# NCEES Salaries/Budgets



## automatic (Aug 9, 2016)

Since NCEES is a non profit, I am assuming that their employee salaries and budgets are available somewhere for the public? Anyone know how to view them?

Also, would anyone know if any of this information can be requested via a FOIA request?


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 9, 2016)

I believe they are a private organization so they're not subject to freedom of information act


----------



## automatic (Aug 9, 2016)

Looks like IRS information is public: http://www.guidestar.org/profile/57-0341195

Need to dig in tonight to see how much these guys are making.


----------



## matt267 PE (Aug 9, 2016)

This will be interesting. 

opcorn:


----------



## automatic (Aug 9, 2016)

http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/570/570341195/570341195_201409_990.pdf


----------



## automatic (Aug 9, 2016)

automatic said:


> http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/570/570341195/570341195_201409_990.pdf


That's a good chunk of money for them to at least respond back to members with a serious issue many are facing......... NCEES records system upgrade debacle....

I really want to find out how much the project cost and how much the CTO bonus was for this effort....


----------



## automatic (Aug 10, 2016)

Searching for 2014 and 2015 990s. Will be interesting to see the raises for the past few years....


----------



## Ken PE 3.1 (Aug 10, 2016)

Can I be CEO down there?


----------



## automatic (Aug 11, 2016)

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2013/570/341/2013-570341195-0a0b9f0e-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2012/570/341/2012-570341195-08feeaa4-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/F990T/2011/570/341/2011-570341195-07f89b6b-T.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/F990T/2010/570/341/2010-570341195-06d83df7-T.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/F990T/2009/570/341/2009-570341195-05b13566-T.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/ViewPdf.aspx?PdfSource=0&amp;ein=57-0341195


----------



## Maji (Aug 17, 2016)

automatic said:


> http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2013/570/341/2013-570341195-0a0b9f0e-9.pdf
> 
> http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2012/570/341/2012-570341195-08feeaa4-9.pdf
> 
> ...


Thank you automatic for doing the leg work here.

Total compensation for the CEO is perhaps better than most mid sized engineering companies, at least from what I know. I wish he did a better job of working with the members who pay their dues that pays his salary.


----------



## automatic (Aug 17, 2016)

I emailed everyone on their leadership team about the new Records system issue. I also requested a phone conversation since emails were not getting the message across. Not one of them responded back.


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 17, 2016)

_(not being sarcastic)_

Because they don't work for you / us they work for the State Boards of each State- &amp; the State Boards are "nominated" by the state legislature.. So basically they don't give a F.....

But maybe a new angle is to communicate with the actual state board members, because that's who ultimately pulls their strings..


----------



## cupojoe PE PMP (Aug 17, 2016)

automatic said:


> I emailed everyone on their leadership team about the new Records system issue. I also requested a phone conversation since emails were not getting the message across. Not one of them responded back.


What exactly is the problem that warrants this?


----------



## knight1fox3 (Aug 18, 2016)

cupojoe PE PMP said:


> What exactly is the problem that warrants this?


----------



## snickerd3 (Aug 18, 2016)

so what does the visitor post on the FB say?  I can't view it here


----------



## knight1fox3 (Aug 18, 2016)

snickerd3 said:


> so what does the visitor post on the FB say?  I can't view it here


It's essentially what the OP has been posting in that thread. I also echoed some of my own concerns. But as I figured, it has fallen on deaf ears. I agree to some extent with @Road Guy but only as it pertains to becoming licensed directly. In my opinion the Records program was a per user direct business relationship as it had little or no interaction with state board (from an establishment/maintenance perspective). But now that they've removed the fee, I feel we can hardly hold them liable for any services at this point.


----------



## ptatohed (Aug 18, 2016)

I don't have the foggiest idea of what you guys are talking about.  :S


----------



## Ken PE 3.1 (Aug 18, 2016)

knight1fox3 said:


> > 1 hour ago, snickerd3 said: so what does the visitor post on the FB say?  I can't view it here
> 
> 
> It's essentially what the OP has been posting in that thread. I also echoed some of my own concerns. But as I figured, it has fallen on deaf ears. I agree to some extent with @Road Guy but only as it pertains to becoming licensed directly. In my opinion the Records program was a per user direct business relationship as it had little or no interaction with state board (from an establishment/maintenance perspective). But now that they've removed the fee, I feel we can hardly hold them liable for any services at this point. [emoji20]


No yearly maintenance fee, but bigger transfer fees.


----------



## knight1fox3 (Aug 19, 2016)

ptatohed said:


> I don't have the foggiest idea of what you guys are talking about.  :S


Do you/did you have a record with NCEES such that it would accelerate the process to allow you to become licensed in other states?


----------



## smahurin (Aug 19, 2016)

Ken PE 3.0 said:


> No yearly maintenance fee, but bigger transfer fees.


I obviously haven't been paying any attention to the other thread nor have I done anything with my Record since the upgrade, but this sounds like a good thing?  The yearly maintenance fee was annoying.


----------



## ptatohed (Aug 19, 2016)

knight1fox3 said:


> Do you/did you have a record with NCEES such that it would accelerate the process to allow you to become licensed in other states?


Ummmm...... mmmmmmm........ hmmmmmmm...........uhhhhhhhh......................... no.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer (Aug 19, 2016)

Man, Betsy Pearson is getting screwed; 40 hour work week but only getting $44,808 as a CFO.


----------



## knight1fox3 (Aug 19, 2016)

ptatohed said:


> Ummmm...... mmmmmmm........ hmmmmmmm...........uhhhhhhhh......................... no.


Well let's just say you did, for argumentative purposes. And to establish said record, you had to go through the same rigmarole as when you applied to sit for the PE exam. Thins such as work history, school transcripts, and 5 (not 3) PE references plus the $100 fee. That's just for the application. Then it goes through a lengthy NCEES review process. 2-3 months later (assuming no info has been challenged), walla! You have a record with NCEES and are issued a card and number. Each time you'd like to have your record transmitted to a state jurisdiction for licensure, that will cost you around $70 (not including any state specific fees). In addition, to maintain your record on an annual basis, you must get an updated PE reference and update your work experience plus pay $25. Each year this must be done. Which is fine as this comes with the territory of being a record holder. 

Fast forward to June 2016 (I established my record in 2011). NCEES puts out a brief email indicating, "The Records system will be down for approximately 10 days for maintenance and various upgrades". Note that there was no mention of any user-interaction required at this point. Let alone any detailed information as to what was being done to the Records program. A few weeks later, those of us who keep tabs on these things, are now told that the Records system has "merged" with your MyNCEES account. Something I've not had to access since passing the PE exam. Once I get my login, there's a message that says we must have our Record "converted" so it can be integrated with MyNCEES. Takes about (2) weeks for that process. Another EB member discovered that only upon *REQUESTING A RECORD TRANSMITTAL*, that we must manually update our references to digital form (using the online interface) and have the said references *RE-APPROVE*. Not such a big deal for new Record holders and those in the application period, but for those of us legacy holders, it's very likely that it would be very difficult to track down our original references for re-approval. Some of us haven't had contact with them and/or changed jobs since then. For me specifically, 2 or 3 of mine are long since retired. So now we're supposed to re-establish our own record with new references because NCEES couldn't migrate their own data over electronically? Seems logical. But hey, they no longer require the $25 fee. 

And now you're all caught up.


----------



## ptatohed (Aug 19, 2016)

Thanks k1f3.    

Sorry about your troubles.  That does suck.


----------



## ptatohed (Aug 20, 2016)

Again, I do appreciate the explanation from knight.  But, I still don't see the relationship of this to NCEES salaries, budgets, and 990s.  :I 

I want to move this thread because it has nothing to do with the PE Exam but I can't think of another appropriate forum either!  :S 

Good luck guys.  Hopefully you can work something out with NCEES where you won't have to reestablish your record application with references.


----------

