“opening the pathways to engineering” that looks like america · g all other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g...

16
National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc. A graduating class of engineers and an engineering workforce that looks like America ANNUAL REPORT 2005

Upload: others

Post on 26-Jul-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

C4

National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc.

NACME, Inc.440 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 302White Plains, NY 10601-1813

tel 914/539-4010fax 914/539-4032

www.NACME. o rg /05

NACME, a charitable, not-for-profit corporation, welcomes your tax-deductible contribution.Visit www.NACME.org/contribute to support our work today.

National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc.

A graduating class of engineers and an engineering workforce

that looks like America

A N N U A L R E P O R T 2 0 0 5

“Opening the Pathways to Engineering”

Page 2: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

1

This past year has been a truly significant one for NACME. Not only have we been able to fulfill the promise

made at our 30th Anniversary Gala to increase the number of scholarships awarded by over 40 percent, we

have added 12 new universities to the list of academic partners who work with us to increase the representation

of underrepresented minority students in engineering. Our 2005 Annual Report presents a picture of an organization

committed to a vision of the future: “an engineering workforce that looks like America.”

Our goal is simple. We strive to increase the number of students whose educations we help support so that more

of those who have been historically underserved and underrepresented will study engineering and become active

participants in our nation’s technological workforce. But we know that cannot be done unless there is a dramatic

increase in the number of young people, especially minorities, who graduate from high school motivated and

prepared to do so. When that is accomplished, we will have met our goal and the nation will produce “an engi-

neering graduating class that looks like America.”

To that end, NACME has invested a considerable portion of the past year developing a pre-engineering studies

strategy. We believe that we can play an important leadership role in conveying to middle and high school students

the excitement and opportunities present in an engineering career. We need to help them—and their parents—

become knowledgeable about the field of engineering and the academic requirements to enter its study.

Importantly, we need to make them fully aware that there are organizations like NACME, and supporters like

our donors, who are prepared to help them succeed.

We are thankful for the continued strong encouragement and financial assistance we have received from those

individuals, corporations, and foundations that, through their support, have expressed their commitment to the

vision expressed above. We trust that you will see depicted in the pages of this annual report the image of an

organization focused on its mission, dedicated to the purposes it extols, and true to its beliefs. We look forward

to the future with enthusiasm.

Thank you for being such an important part of NACME.

A JOINT MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN & THE PRESIDENT

John Brooks Slaughter, Ph.D.President & CEONACME, Inc.

Michael L. King , Ph.D.Chairman, NACME, Inc.Senior Vice President,Science and TechnologyMerck & Co., Inc.

CONTENTS

1 Chairman/President Letter2 Pre-engineering Studies4 Scholarships6 Research and Policy8 Financial Statements

10 Donors12 Partner Institutions13 Board, Officers, Staff,

Research Council

A PROFILE OF NACME

O U R M I S S I O N

To provide leadership and support for the national effort to increase the representation of

successful African American, American Indian and Latino women and men in engineering

and technology, math- and science-based careers.

O U R V I S I O N

An engineering workforce that looks like America.

O U R G O A L

Working with our partners to produce an engineering graduating class that looks like America.

O U R P U R P O S E

Our goal is diversity with equity; our metric is parity in the workforce; and our methodology is the

formation of partnerships with those corporations, educational institutions, foundations, nonprofit

agencies and governmental bodies that share a commitment to these aims.

O U R B E L I E F S

We believe in the concept of the “learning organization,” a community in which each member

is encouraged and assisted to grow and develop. We believe that we must work not only to

continuously improve our skills and capabilities for performing our individual responsibilities

increasingly well, but also to strive to be cooperative and effective team members who are

committed collectively to the fulfillment of NACME’s mission and purposes.

Page 3: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

1

This past year has been a truly significant one for NACME. Not only have we been able to fulfill the promise

made at our 30th Anniversary Gala to increase the number of scholarships awarded by over 40 percent, we

have added 12 new universities to the list of academic partners who work with us to increase the representation

of underrepresented minority students in engineering. Our 2005 Annual Report presents a picture of an organization

committed to a vision of the future: “an engineering workforce that looks like America.”

Our goal is simple. We strive to increase the number of students whose educations we help support so that more

of those who have been historically underserved and underrepresented will study engineering and become active

participants in our nation’s technological workforce. But we know that cannot be done unless there is a dramatic

increase in the number of young people, especially minorities, who graduate from high school motivated and

prepared to do so. When that is accomplished, we will have met our goal and the nation will produce “an engi-

neering graduating class that looks like America.”

To that end, NACME has invested a considerable portion of the past year developing a pre-engineering studies

strategy. We believe that we can play an important leadership role in conveying to middle and high school students

the excitement and opportunities present in an engineering career. We need to help them—and their parents—

become knowledgeable about the field of engineering and the academic requirements to enter its study.

Importantly, we need to make them fully aware that there are organizations like NACME, and supporters like

our donors, who are prepared to help them succeed.

We are thankful for the continued strong encouragement and financial assistance we have received from those

individuals, corporations, and foundations that, through their support, have expressed their commitment to the

vision expressed above. We trust that you will see depicted in the pages of this annual report the image of an

organization focused on its mission, dedicated to the purposes it extols, and true to its beliefs. We look forward

to the future with enthusiasm.

Thank you for being such an important part of NACME.

A JOINT MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN & THE PRESIDENT

John Brooks Slaughter, Ph.D.President & CEONACME, Inc.

Michael L. King , Ph.D.Chairman, NACME, Inc.Senior Vice President,Science and TechnologyMerck & Co., Inc.

CONTENTS

1 Chairman/President Letter2 Pre-engineering Studies4 Scholarships6 Research and Policy8 Financial Statements

10 Donors12 Partner Institutions13 Board, Officers, Staff,

Research Council

A PROFILE OF NACME

O U R M I S S I O N

To provide leadership and support for the national effort to increase the representation of

successful African American, American Indian and Latino women and men in engineering

and technology, math- and science-based careers.

O U R V I S I O N

An engineering workforce that looks like America.

O U R G O A L

Working with our partners to produce an engineering graduating class that looks like America.

O U R P U R P O S E

Our goal is diversity with equity; our metric is parity in the workforce; and our methodology is the

formation of partnerships with those corporations, educational institutions, foundations, nonprofit

agencies and governmental bodies that share a commitment to these aims.

O U R B E L I E F S

We believe in the concept of the “learning organization,” a community in which each member

is encouraged and assisted to grow and develop. We believe that we must work not only to

continuously improve our skills and capabilities for performing our individual responsibilities

increasingly well, but also to strive to be cooperative and effective team members who are

committed collectively to the fulfillment of NACME’s mission and purposes.

Page 4: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

32

n the fall of 2004, NACME, with the support and

involvement of our board, initiated a strategic planning

process to examine ways in which we could enhance

our efforts to increase the participation of minority

students in engineering. The resulting strategy called

for a new emphasis on secondary school education,

specifically one directed toward support of the Science,

Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) curricula.

We also recognize the lack of programs to support and

encourage students at two-year institutions to pursue

engineering studies in four-year institutions.

We were struck by the realization that only four percent of

minority high school graduates have completed the

mathematics and sciences courses that are prerequi-

sites for engineering study (see charts on page 3).

Furthermore, few of them have been made aware of

the excitement and opportunities that the field of engi-

neering presents.

Therefore, we have embarked upon a pre-engineering

studies effort designed to introduce secondary school

students to engineering and technology, and encourage

them to take the courses that will prepare them to be

able to study engineering upon their graduation from high

school. In this way, NACME can support those strategic

initiatives designed to increase the number of college-

ready minority aspirants for engineering study who will

be available to benefit from our core activity, scholarships.

In our quest to find the best fit for our organization in the

realm of secondary school STEM education, we engaged

in a number of activities. In October 2004, we convened

a roundtable meeting of representatives from prominent

academic institutions, foundations, corporations and

regional school districts. We reached out to high schools

having engineering as a positive, powerful theme through-

out the curriculum and met with officials of major city

school systems and non-profit organizations.

Community colleges also represent a significant source

of eligible students for baccalaureate engineering pro-

grams. NACME met with leaders of two- and four-year

institutions to understand the barriers minority students

face in continuing their education in pursuit of a degree

in engineering.

We are committed to developing and implementing a

comprehensive pre-engineering studies program

focused on increasing the number of minorities on the

pathways to engineering.

PRE-ENGINEERING STUDIES: A YEAR OF PLANNING

Only four percent of minority high school

graduates have completed the prerequisite math

and science courses for engineering study. To

produce a college engineering graduating class

that looks like America, we must dramatically

improve this number.

Comparison of URMs* and Non-URMs in the Engineering Pipeline

URMs Non-URMs

Public school students in 1998 33.2% 66.8%

Engineering freshmen in Fall 1999 15.6% 84.4%

*URMs= Underrepresented minorities Source: NCES and EWC

While underrepresented minority students number one third of the highschool population, only four percent are sufficiently educated to applyfor entry to engineering programs. Consequently, they are dramaticallyunderrepresented in our college engineering programs.

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000690,000

4% of Graduates

59% of Eligible

28,300 16,800

MinorityHigh SchoolGraduates

EngineeringEligible

EngineeringAdmits

The Undertapped Minority Pool

Approximately 690,000 minority students graduated from high school in2002. Only 28,300 (4%) were considered “engineering eligible” based oncourses taken and grades. Of these, 16,800 (59%) enrolled as freshmenin engineering schools, out of 107,000 total admissions.

Source: CPST, data derived from NCES and EWC, 2002

g African American

g Latino

g All Other

5.1%

4.5%

90.4%

gg African American

gg Latino

gg All Other

5.1%4.5%

90.4%

Composition of the EngineeringWorkforce, 2004

Source: CPST, data derived from CPS, BLS

While the actual percentage of underrepresented minorities inthe U.S. population is 27% the number of underrepresentedminority engineers in the workforce is less than 10%.

I

Page 5: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

32

n the fall of 2004, NACME, with the support and

involvement of our board, initiated a strategic planning

process to examine ways in which we could enhance

our efforts to increase the participation of minority

students in engineering. The resulting strategy called

for a new emphasis on secondary school education,

specifically one directed toward support of the Science,

Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) curricula.

We also recognize the lack of programs to support and

encourage students at two-year institutions to pursue

engineering studies in four-year institutions.

We were struck by the realization that only four percent of

minority high school graduates have completed the

mathematics and sciences courses that are prerequi-

sites for engineering study (see charts on page 3).

Furthermore, few of them have been made aware of

the excitement and opportunities that the field of engi-

neering presents.

Therefore, we have embarked upon a pre-engineering

studies effort designed to introduce secondary school

students to engineering and technology, and encourage

them to take the courses that will prepare them to be

able to study engineering upon their graduation from high

school. In this way, NACME can support those strategic

initiatives designed to increase the number of college-

ready minority aspirants for engineering study who will

be available to benefit from our core activity, scholarships.

In our quest to find the best fit for our organization in the

realm of secondary school STEM education, we engaged

in a number of activities. In October 2004, we convened

a roundtable meeting of representatives from prominent

academic institutions, foundations, corporations and

regional school districts. We reached out to high schools

having engineering as a positive, powerful theme through-

out the curriculum and met with officials of major city

school systems and non-profit organizations.

Community colleges also represent a significant source

of eligible students for baccalaureate engineering pro-

grams. NACME met with leaders of two- and four-year

institutions to understand the barriers minority students

face in continuing their education in pursuit of a degree

in engineering.

We are committed to developing and implementing a

comprehensive pre-engineering studies program

focused on increasing the number of minorities on the

pathways to engineering.

PRE-ENGINEERING STUDIES: A YEAR OF PLANNING

Only four percent of minority high school

graduates have completed the prerequisite math

and science courses for engineering study. To

produce a college engineering graduating class

that looks like America, we must dramatically

improve this number.

Comparison of URMs* and Non-URMs in the Engineering Pipeline

URMs Non-URMs

Public school students in 1998 33.2% 66.8%

Engineering freshmen in Fall 1999 15.6% 84.4%

*URMs= Underrepresented minorities Source: NCES and EWC

While underrepresented minority students number one third of the highschool population, only four percent are sufficiently educated to applyfor entry to engineering programs. Consequently, they are dramaticallyunderrepresented in our college engineering programs.

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000690,000

4% of Graduates

59% of Eligible

28,300 16,800

MinorityHigh SchoolGraduates

EngineeringEligible

EngineeringAdmits

The Undertapped Minority Pool

Approximately 690,000 minority students graduated from high school in2002. Only 28,300 (4%) were considered “engineering eligible” based oncourses taken and grades. Of these, 16,800 (59%) enrolled as freshmenin engineering schools, out of 107,000 total admissions.

Source: CPST, data derived from NCES and EWC, 2002

g African American

g Latino

g All Other

5.1%

4.5%

90.4%

gg African American

gg Latino

gg All Other

5.1%4.5%

90.4%

Composition of the EngineeringWorkforce, 2004

Source: CPST, data derived from CPS, BLS

While the actual percentage of underrepresented minorities inthe U.S. population is 27% the number of underrepresentedminority engineers in the workforce is less than 10%.

I

Page 6: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

54

ince it was founded, NACME has refined its

strategy for partnering with students, universities

and corporations. We know that the most effec-

tive strategies include more than just financial aid;

they require that students be given a comprehensive

range of support, including the opportunity to have

internships, practical research experiences, leadership

training and mentoring.

We know that of all the barriers to minority retention,

lack of financial resources is the most significant. The

cost of higher education grows annually in double digits;

federal aid is unable to keep pace; reductions have

occurred in state support and, as a result, student loans

have increased dramatically. Now, more than ever

before, NACME scholarships help make the difference.

In this fiscal year, NACME increased by 41% the number

of underrepresented minority engineering scholars

supported, to 746. We added 9 academic institutions

to our partnership family, now totaling 34 well-respected

colleges and universities spread across our great nation.

Our scholarship programs are focused on schools that

have demonstrated the ability and commitment to retain

all students, particularly minority students, to graduation.

These partnerships — which represent approximately

30% of all engineering degrees awarded in America —

and the sharing of best practices are centered on

improving the retention rate of minority students in

all schools of engineering throughout the country.

This academic year marks the completion of the first

phase of our growth strategy. Our long-term goal is to

double NACME scholars supported annually to 1,600

and grow the number of partner schools to 54 by 2009.

Comprehensive scholarship programs such as ours have

proven to deliver a measurable return on investment

in the form of student retention and improved academic

performance. NACME scholars achieved a graduation

rate of 80 percent — more than double the national

average of 39 percent for minorities, and substantially

above the national average of 62 percent for all stu-

dents. The average NACME Scholar GPA is an

impressive 3.2. (See chart on facing page for complete

NACME Scholar profile, including statistics on discipline,

ethnicity and sex).

Our partners are building supportive environments to

prepare engineering students for the workforce. In the

past 12 months, we convened two conferences attended

by over 100 representatives from 30 universities to

share experiences and best practices for pre-college

outreach, student recruitment and retention.

We developed and launched a new Internet-based

network to help increase our value to our students and

corporate partners. Our NACME Scholar Online Resume

Directory is an easy-to-use tool connecting corporate

recruiting managers and students for rapid response to

opportunities for internships, co-op assignments or full-

time positions. Corporate sponsors attended user

training sessions and were enthusiastic about the ease

of identifying students for work experience opportunities.

Our scholarship programs are designed to produce

graduates who increasingly “look like America.” We are

proud of the achievements of the NACME Scholars of

the past, and look forward to the contributions of a new

generation of underrepresented minority engineers.

The importance of the NACME scholarship programs

cannot be overstated in the face of the dramatic changes

in the global economy and our nation’s need to maintain

its technological leadership in the 21st century.

265

171

115195

SCHOLARSHIPS: OUR CORE MISSION

NORTHEAST

SOUTHEAST

MIDWEST

WEST

g African American g Latino

g American Indian g Other

49%

3%

44%

4%

NACME Scholars by Region, 2004-2005

NACME Scholars by Ethnicity — 2005In the past 31 years, NACME has provided more

than $75 million for scholarship programs,

and has supported more than 20,000 African

Americans, American Indians and Latinos in

the pursuit of careers in engineering.

NACME Scholars by Discipline 2005 vs. 2004

Major 2005 2004 ChangeElectrical Engineering 147 98 50%

Mechanical Engineering 146 97 51%

Computer Engineering 73 58 26%

Civil/Environmental Engineering 69 39 77%

Chemical Engineering 65 54 20%

Computer Science 51 44 16%

Biomedical/Bio Engineering 40 26 54%

IE/OR 30 23 30%

Engineering Science 30 13 131%

Information Systems/Technology 11 15 -27%

Other 84 61 38%

Totals 746 528 41% 36% of NACME Scholars are female

NACME is proud to provide management support for the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Minority Ph.D. Program

and the American Indian Graduate Program directed by Dr. Ted Greenwood. The Sloan Foundation is a leader in

the effort to increase the number of minority students pursuing doctoral degrees in engineering, mathematics

and the natural sciences. Now entering its 10th year, this innovative program currently supports more than 400

students, and can point to over 100 scholars who have earned their Ph.D.

S

Page 7: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

54

ince it was founded, NACME has refined its

strategy for partnering with students, universities

and corporations. We know that the most effec-

tive strategies include more than just financial aid;

they require that students be given a comprehensive

range of support, including the opportunity to have

internships, practical research experiences, leadership

training and mentoring.

We know that of all the barriers to minority retention,

lack of financial resources is the most significant. The

cost of higher education grows annually in double digits;

federal aid is unable to keep pace; reductions have

occurred in state support and, as a result, student loans

have increased dramatically. Now, more than ever

before, NACME scholarships help make the difference.

In this fiscal year, NACME increased by 41% the number

of underrepresented minority engineering scholars

supported, to 746. We added 9 academic institutions

to our partnership family, now totaling 34 well-respected

colleges and universities spread across our great nation.

Our scholarship programs are focused on schools that

have demonstrated the ability and commitment to retain

all students, particularly minority students, to graduation.

These partnerships — which represent approximately

30% of all engineering degrees awarded in America —

and the sharing of best practices are centered on

improving the retention rate of minority students in

all schools of engineering throughout the country.

This academic year marks the completion of the first

phase of our growth strategy. Our long-term goal is to

double NACME scholars supported annually to 1,600

and grow the number of partner schools to 54 by 2009.

Comprehensive scholarship programs such as ours have

proven to deliver a measurable return on investment

in the form of student retention and improved academic

performance. NACME scholars achieved a graduation

rate of 80 percent — more than double the national

average of 39 percent for minorities, and substantially

above the national average of 62 percent for all stu-

dents. The average NACME Scholar GPA is an

impressive 3.2. (See chart on facing page for complete

NACME Scholar profile, including statistics on discipline,

ethnicity and sex).

Our partners are building supportive environments to

prepare engineering students for the workforce. In the

past 12 months, we convened two conferences attended

by over 100 representatives from 30 universities to

share experiences and best practices for pre-college

outreach, student recruitment and retention.

We developed and launched a new Internet-based

network to help increase our value to our students and

corporate partners. Our NACME Scholar Online Resume

Directory is an easy-to-use tool connecting corporate

recruiting managers and students for rapid response to

opportunities for internships, co-op assignments or full-

time positions. Corporate sponsors attended user

training sessions and were enthusiastic about the ease

of identifying students for work experience opportunities.

Our scholarship programs are designed to produce

graduates who increasingly “look like America.” We are

proud of the achievements of the NACME Scholars of

the past, and look forward to the contributions of a new

generation of underrepresented minority engineers.

The importance of the NACME scholarship programs

cannot be overstated in the face of the dramatic changes

in the global economy and our nation’s need to maintain

its technological leadership in the 21st century.

265

171

115195

SCHOLARSHIPS: OUR CORE MISSION

NORTHEAST

SOUTHEAST

MIDWEST

WEST

g African American g Latino

g American Indian g Other

49%

3%

44%

4%

NACME Scholars by Region, 2004-2005

NACME Scholars by Ethnicity — 2005In the past 31 years, NACME has provided more

than $75 million for scholarship programs,

and has supported more than 20,000 African

Americans, American Indians and Latinos in

the pursuit of careers in engineering.

NACME Scholars by Discipline 2005 vs. 2004

Major 2005 2004 ChangeElectrical Engineering 147 98 50%

Mechanical Engineering 146 97 51%

Computer Engineering 73 58 26%

Civil/Environmental Engineering 69 39 77%

Chemical Engineering 65 54 20%

Computer Science 51 44 16%

Biomedical/Bio Engineering 40 26 54%

IE/OR 30 23 30%

Engineering Science 30 13 131%

Information Systems/Technology 11 15 -27%

Other 84 61 38%

Totals 746 528 41% 36% of NACME Scholars are female

NACME is proud to provide management support for the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Minority Ph.D. Program

and the American Indian Graduate Program directed by Dr. Ted Greenwood. The Sloan Foundation is a leader in

the effort to increase the number of minority students pursuing doctoral degrees in engineering, mathematics

and the natural sciences. Now entering its 10th year, this innovative program currently supports more than 400

students, and can point to over 100 scholars who have earned their Ph.D.

S

Page 8: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

73/74 78/79 83/84 88/89 93/94 99/00 04/05

0

20

40

60

80

%100

ACADEMIC YEAR

PE

RC

EN

T O

F A

LL

FR

ES

HM

EN

4.4 %16.3 % 15.3 %

URM National PopulationRepresentation: (2003)

27%

Non-URMs

URMs

76

• After the Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger

cases, NACME joined with the American Association

for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to produce

the report, “Standing Our Ground: A Guidebook for

STEM Educators in the Post-Michigan Era.” NACME

bases its academic institutional support on this

document, which provided guidance to university

administrators for complying with the U.S. Supreme

Court’s decisions on those important affirmative

action cases.

• NACME will develop and implement programs in the

pre-engineering arena to increase the number of

minority students graduating from high school who

are eligible to enroll in a four-year engineering pro-

gram. The Council will evaluate the outcomes and

provide recommendations for improvement.

The NACME Research and Policy Program will continue

to be a major factor in shaping strategy and driving

change in the effort to increase minority representation

in engineering.

eveloped as the foundation for the organiza-

tion’s strategic directions and programs,

NACME research and policy studies remain

the principal source of information and analysis on

trends in minority engineering enrollment, retention,

graduation and other key indicators. The results of our

work have been used by industry, government and

academic institutions to understand and set policy to

address the underlying issues of underrepresented

minorities in engineering.

Over the years, NACME has provided briefings and

testimony to the President's Council of Advisors on

Science and Technology, the President’s Office of

Science and Technology Policy, Congress, and the

National Science Foundation, to name a few. NACME

has also filed briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in

support of legal issues central to our mission.

The mission of the NACME Research and Policy Program

is to identify and articulate national issues, and drive

program development, scholarship strategies, commu-

nications and public policy initiatives. NACME’s research

supports many companies and other organizations

around the nation striving to understand the underlying

issues of underrepresented minorities in engineering,

and looking for measurable results from the programs

they fund.

NACME identified a need to have a broader and more

in-depth view of the trends that impact minorities seeking

careers in engineering and technology, and extend our

influence in policy-setting. NACME sought researchers

with experience and expertise in secondary school, under-

graduate and graduate education, and the engineering

workforce. These professionals now comprise the newly

formed NACME Research and Policy Advisory Council

(see list of members on page 13).

Currently three activities of the Council stand out:

• Launched in 1995, the NACME Vanguard Program is

a cooperative effort between NACME and selected

academic institutions to increase the number of minority

students graduating with engineering baccalaureate

degrees. The program was designed around intense

academic immersion and leadership training to cultur-

ally diverse cohorts of students. It provides full tuition,

which almost totally eliminates the need for student

loans or part-time jobs. The Council is evaluating the

results achieved by each university, with the goal of

identifying best practices.

NACME’s Research and Policy initiatives

are essential for shaping our programs and

activities to address the many issues affecting

the representation of African Americans,

American Indians and Latinos in the U.S.

engineering profession.

RESEARCH AND POLICY: A SOLID FOUNDATION

72/73 77/78 82/83 87/88 92/93 97/98 02/03

0

20

40

60

80

% 100

g Non-URMs

g URMs

ACADEMIC YEAR

PE

RC

EN

T O

F A

LL

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G G

RA

DU

AT

ES

2.9% 10.4% 9.9%

URM National PopulationRepresentation: (2003)

27%

Freshman Enrollment in Engineering: URMs* vs. NON-URMs

Engineering Bachelor’s Degrees:URMs* vs. NON-URMs

The progress made in increasing underrepresented minority enrollment in engineering is morethan offset by the lower retention rate of underrepresented minorities (39%), when compared tothat of all students (63%).

Scholarship programs such as NACME’s have significantly improved the numbers of underrepresentedminorities entering engineering. However, the United States still falls far short of the ultimate goal ofproportional minority representation, which in 2003 stood at 27%.

*URMs=Underrepresented minorities Source: Engineering Workforce Commission, U.S. Census Bureau figures*URMs=Underrepresented minorities Source: CPST, data derived from EWC, U.S. Census Bureau figures

D

Page 9: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

73/74 78/79 83/84 88/89 93/94 99/00 04/05

0

20

40

60

80

%100

ACADEMIC YEAR

PE

RC

EN

T O

F A

LL

FR

ES

HM

EN

4.4 %16.3 % 15.3 %

URM National PopulationRepresentation: (2003)

27%

Non-URMs

URMs

76

• After the Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger

cases, NACME joined with the American Association

for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to produce

the report, “Standing Our Ground: A Guidebook for

STEM Educators in the Post-Michigan Era.” NACME

bases its academic institutional support on this

document, which provided guidance to university

administrators for complying with the U.S. Supreme

Court’s decisions on those important affirmative

action cases.

• NACME will develop and implement programs in the

pre-engineering arena to increase the number of

minority students graduating from high school who

are eligible to enroll in a four-year engineering pro-

gram. The Council will evaluate the outcomes and

provide recommendations for improvement.

The NACME Research and Policy Program will continue

to be a major factor in shaping strategy and driving

change in the effort to increase minority representation

in engineering.

eveloped as the foundation for the organiza-

tion’s strategic directions and programs,

NACME research and policy studies remain

the principal source of information and analysis on

trends in minority engineering enrollment, retention,

graduation and other key indicators. The results of our

work have been used by industry, government and

academic institutions to understand and set policy to

address the underlying issues of underrepresented

minorities in engineering.

Over the years, NACME has provided briefings and

testimony to the President's Council of Advisors on

Science and Technology, the President’s Office of

Science and Technology Policy, Congress, and the

National Science Foundation, to name a few. NACME

has also filed briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in

support of legal issues central to our mission.

The mission of the NACME Research and Policy Program

is to identify and articulate national issues, and drive

program development, scholarship strategies, commu-

nications and public policy initiatives. NACME’s research

supports many companies and other organizations

around the nation striving to understand the underlying

issues of underrepresented minorities in engineering,

and looking for measurable results from the programs

they fund.

NACME identified a need to have a broader and more

in-depth view of the trends that impact minorities seeking

careers in engineering and technology, and extend our

influence in policy-setting. NACME sought researchers

with experience and expertise in secondary school, under-

graduate and graduate education, and the engineering

workforce. These professionals now comprise the newly

formed NACME Research and Policy Advisory Council

(see list of members on page 13).

Currently three activities of the Council stand out:

• Launched in 1995, the NACME Vanguard Program is

a cooperative effort between NACME and selected

academic institutions to increase the number of minority

students graduating with engineering baccalaureate

degrees. The program was designed around intense

academic immersion and leadership training to cultur-

ally diverse cohorts of students. It provides full tuition,

which almost totally eliminates the need for student

loans or part-time jobs. The Council is evaluating the

results achieved by each university, with the goal of

identifying best practices.

NACME’s Research and Policy initiatives

are essential for shaping our programs and

activities to address the many issues affecting

the representation of African Americans,

American Indians and Latinos in the U.S.

engineering profession.

RESEARCH AND POLICY: A SOLID FOUNDATION

72/73 77/78 82/83 87/88 92/93 97/98 02/03

0

20

40

60

80

% 100

g Non-URMs

g URMs

ACADEMIC YEAR

PE

RC

EN

T O

F A

LL

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G G

RA

DU

AT

ES

2.9% 10.4% 9.9%

URM National PopulationRepresentation: (2003)

27%

Freshman Enrollment in Engineering: URMs* vs. NON-URMs

Engineering Bachelor’s Degrees:URMs* vs. NON-URMs

The progress made in increasing underrepresented minority enrollment in engineering is morethan offset by the lower retention rate of underrepresented minorities (39%), when compared tothat of all students (63%).

Scholarship programs such as NACME’s have significantly improved the numbers of underrepresentedminorities entering engineering. However, the United States still falls far short of the ultimate goal ofproportional minority representation, which in 2003 stood at 27%.

*URMs=Underrepresented minorities Source: Engineering Workforce Commission, U.S. Census Bureau figures*URMs=Underrepresented minorities Source: CPST, data derived from EWC, U.S. Census Bureau figures

D

Page 10: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

98

TOTAL ALL FUNDS

2005 2004

PUBLIC SUPPORT AND REVENUE:

Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,984,507 $3,606,656

Contributions in-kind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,778,891 $3,583,869

Government grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,985 564,719

Interest and dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372,209 371,655

30th Anniversary Dinner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1,644,620

Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,448 50,599

Total Public Support and Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,227,040 $ 9,822,118

EXPENSES:

Program Services:

Scholarship programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,153,535 $5,200,952

Education programs and training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156,655 100,817

Information dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416,902 332,748

Research and policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308,373 456,476

Total Program Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,035,466 $6,090,993

Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910,865 679,627

Management and general . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 722,617 1,081,493

30th Anniversary Dinner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 684,327

Total Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,668,948 $8,536,439

Excess (deficiency) of operating public support and revenue over expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 558,092 $ 1,285,679

Other Income (Expenses):

Gain (Loss) on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 868,122 $ 172,099

Total Other Income (Expenses) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 868,122 $ 172,099

Change in Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,426,214 $ 1,457,778

Net Assets at beginning of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,349,141 $4,891,363

Net Assets at end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,775,355 $ 6,349,141

TOTAL ALL FUNDS

2005 2004

ASSETS:

Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,605,310 $ 1,049,411

Short-term investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,097,332 12,049,912

Pledges receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,091,075 1,164,147

Interest and other receivables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4,747) 0

Prepaid expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,005 0

Long-term Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,035,728 1,002,574

Leasehold improvements, office furniture and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266,215 356,574

Security deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,038 48,038

Restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,312 24,126

Total Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14,169,268 $15,694,782

LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS:

Liabilities:

Sloan Foundation—program fund advance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,681,411 $ 8,616,080

Accounts payable and accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,816 43,942

Tenant deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,312 24,126

Deferrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501,257 526,945

Deferred compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146,117 134,548

Total Liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,393,913 $ 9,345,641

Net Assets:

Unrestricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,968,990 $ 2,628,906

Temporarily restricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,916,754 2,852,209

Permanently restricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889,611 868,026

Total Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,775,355 $ 6,349,141

Total Liabilities and Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14,169,268 $15,694,782

For the year ended August 31, 2005 (with comparative data for 2004) NACME, Inc. (not-for-profit corporation) For the year ended August 31, 2005 (with comparative data for 2004) NACME, Inc. (not-for-profit corporation)

These financial statements are a condensed version of the audited statements of the National Action Council for Minorities inEngineering, Inc. for the year ending August 31, 2005. NACME will be pleased to provide complete copies along with all foot-notes and the unqualified report of our auditors, upon request.

You may obtain a copy of the latest annual report filed with the N.Y. State Board of Social Welfare by writing to the Secretary,State of New York, 162 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12231, Attention: Charitable Registration Division.

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES

MANAG E M E NT ’S STATE M E NT O F F I NAN C IAL R ES P O N S I B I L I T Y

The management takes full responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the NACME financial statements, presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our corporate governance polices and practices include the following:• A majority of our Board is comprised of independent directors.• Only independent directors are members of our Executive, Governance, Development and Finance Committees.• The Executive, Governance, Development and Finance Committees make appropriate use of charters that clearly detail each

Committee’s responsibilities.• The Finance Committee retains the independent auditors and regularly reviews the financial condition of the company.

The independent auditor has free access to the Finance Committee.We are committed to providing financial information that is transparent, timely, complete, relevant and accurate.

Dr. John Brooks SlaughterPresident and CEO

John C. EppolitoVice President of Administration and CFO

Page 11: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

98

TOTAL ALL FUNDS

2005 2004

PUBLIC SUPPORT AND REVENUE:

Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,984,507 $3,606,656

Contributions in-kind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,778,891 $3,583,869

Government grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,985 564,719

Interest and dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372,209 371,655

30th Anniversary Dinner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1,644,620

Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,448 50,599

Total Public Support and Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,227,040 $ 9,822,118

EXPENSES:

Program Services:

Scholarship programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,153,535 $5,200,952

Education programs and training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156,655 100,817

Information dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416,902 332,748

Research and policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308,373 456,476

Total Program Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,035,466 $6,090,993

Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910,865 679,627

Management and general . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 722,617 1,081,493

30th Anniversary Dinner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 684,327

Total Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,668,948 $8,536,439

Excess (deficiency) of operating public support and revenue over expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 558,092 $ 1,285,679

Other Income (Expenses):

Gain (Loss) on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 868,122 $ 172,099

Total Other Income (Expenses) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 868,122 $ 172,099

Change in Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,426,214 $ 1,457,778

Net Assets at beginning of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,349,141 $4,891,363

Net Assets at end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,775,355 $ 6,349,141

TOTAL ALL FUNDS

2005 2004

ASSETS:

Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,605,310 $ 1,049,411

Short-term investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,097,332 12,049,912

Pledges receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,091,075 1,164,147

Interest and other receivables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4,747) 0

Prepaid expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,005 0

Long-term Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,035,728 1,002,574

Leasehold improvements, office furniture and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266,215 356,574

Security deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,038 48,038

Restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,312 24,126

Total Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14,169,268 $15,694,782

LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS:

Liabilities:

Sloan Foundation—program fund advance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,681,411 $ 8,616,080

Accounts payable and accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,816 43,942

Tenant deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,312 24,126

Deferrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501,257 526,945

Deferred compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146,117 134,548

Total Liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,393,913 $ 9,345,641

Net Assets:

Unrestricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,968,990 $ 2,628,906

Temporarily restricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,916,754 2,852,209

Permanently restricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889,611 868,026

Total Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,775,355 $ 6,349,141

Total Liabilities and Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14,169,268 $15,694,782

For the year ended August 31, 2005 (with comparative data for 2004) NACME, Inc. (not-for-profit corporation) For the year ended August 31, 2005 (with comparative data for 2004) NACME, Inc. (not-for-profit corporation)

These financial statements are a condensed version of the audited statements of the National Action Council for Minorities inEngineering, Inc. for the year ending August 31, 2005. NACME will be pleased to provide complete copies along with all foot-notes and the unqualified report of our auditors, upon request.

You may obtain a copy of the latest annual report filed with the N.Y. State Board of Social Welfare by writing to the Secretary,State of New York, 162 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12231, Attention: Charitable Registration Division.

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES

M ANAG E M E NT ’S STATE M E NT O F F I NAN C IAL R ES P O N S I B I L I T Y

The management takes full responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the NACME financial statements, presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our corporate governance polices and practices include the following:• A majority of our Board is comprised of independent directors.• Only independent directors are members of our Executive, Governance, Development and Finance Committees.• The Executive, Governance, Development and Finance Committees make appropriate use of charters that clearly detail each

Committee’s responsibilities.• The Finance Committee retains the independent auditors and regularly reviews the financial condition of the company.

The independent auditor has free access to the Finance Committee.We are committed to providing financial information that is transparent, timely, complete, relevant and accurate.

Dr. John Brooks SlaughterPresident and CEO

John C. EppolitoVice President of Administration and CFO

Page 12: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

1110

I NST I TUT IONAL DONORS

$500,000 and overDrexel University

$200,000 to $499,999AT&T Foundation

ExxonMobil Corporation

General Electric Company

New Jersey Institute of Technology

Polytechnic University

Rochester Institute of Technology

$100,000 to $199,9993M

Amgen Foundation, Inc.

Booz Allen Hamilton

BP America

Cisco Systems, Inc.

The City College of the City University of New York

Clarkson University

The Dow Chemical Company

General Motors Corporation

Howard University

IBM Corporation

The LisaBeth Foundation

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Northrop Grumman Foundation

Raytheon Company

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

$50,000 to $99,999Agilent Technologies

Alcoa Foundation

The Barkley Fund

Bechtel Corporation

The Boeing Company

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

Cadence Design Systems, Inc.

Chevron Corporation

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

DaimlerChrysler Corporation Fund

Deloitte & Touche LLP

DuPont Company

Eastman Kodak Company

Ford Motor Company

Georgia Institute of Technology

Intel Corporation

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.

Merck & Co., Inc.

North Carolina A&T State University

Pitney Bowes, Inc.

The Pitney Bowes Literacy and Education Fund, Inc.

QUALCOMM Incorporated

Shell Oil Company Foundation

Sony Electronics Inc.

The Starr Foundation

Toyota

University of Colorado at Boulder

Xerox Corporation

$25,000 to $49,999The Ahmanson Foundation

Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

Celestica Corporation

Cravath, Swaine & Moore

International Paper Company Fund

Michigan Technological University

Microsoft Corporation

PACCAR Foundation

Science Applications International Corporation

Siemens Corporation

Texas A&M University

University of Akron

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

University of Missouri-Rolla

$10,000 to $24,999ADC Telecommunications

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

Bucknell University

Fluor Corporation

Genentech, Inc.

Georgia-Pacific Corporation

The Guidant Foundation

Kansas State University

KeySpan Energy

Los Alamos National Laboratory

OPTIMUS Corporation

PPG Industries Foundation

SBC Foundation

Stephen D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation

Symantec Corporation

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

University of Bridgeport

The University of Texas at San Antonio

University of Washington

The UPS Foundation

Virginia Polytechnic University

$5,000 to $9,999Amerada Hess Corporation

American Bureau of Shipping

Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.

Automatic Data Processing Foundation

Bayer Corporation

Caterpillar Foundation

DirectTV

Dominion Resources, Inc.

Energizer Holdings, Inc.

Hertz Corporation

Public Service Electric & Gas Company

Sonalysts

Tennessee Technological University

The University of Texas at El Paso

$1,000 to $4,999Bose Corporation

Candela Corporation

Ceridian Corporation

Consumers Union

Degraw & Associates, P.A.

Geomatrix Consultants, Inc.

Harris Corporation

John Deere Corporation

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kenyon & Kenyon

Mine Safety Appliance Company

Mitretek Systems

Nordson Corporation

Occidental Petroleum Corporation

Temple University

Universal Instruments Corporation

University of California, San Diego

WGBH Educational Foundation

I N D I V I DUAL D ONORS

Founders' Circle ($10,000 and over)Arnold A. Allemang

William P. Dee

James M. Jamieson

Michael L. King

Estate of Mildred Willenbrock

Chairman's Circle ($5,000 to $9,999)Nicholas M. Donofrio

Alvin T. Keith

Harry Longwell

Richard M. Morrow

Lloyd G. Trotter

Benefactor ($2,500 to $4,999)Andrew G. Inglis

James Mahan

Charles E. Redman

J. Stephen Simon

John Brooks Slaughter

Edward S. Taft

William M. Zeitler

Patron ($1,000 to $2,499)Ronald R. Belschner

John E. Bethancourt

Robin Bienfait

Kevin Burke

G. Wayne Clough

John C. Eppolito

Charles L. Gregory

Mary J. Hellyar

Frank Ianna

Willie C. Martin

Michael P. Morley

Deborah L. Morrissett

Hector Motroni

Joseph A. Patt

Tom Price

Scott C. Roberts

David O. Swain

Andrew Valentine

Reginald Van Lee

Gene Washington

Michael J. Weir

Sponsor ($500 to $999)Daryl E. Chubin

Emily H. Deakins

Monica E. Emerson

Michael J. Fister

Courtney Lewis Enslow

John A. Lubbe

Richard J. Martino

Debra Muchow

Donald Newsom

Morris Tanenbaum

Aileen Walter

Phillip T. Woodrow

Wm. A. Wulf

Friend ($100 to $499)Julian M. Babad

Susan R. Bailey

Virginia Cast

Justin Cotton

Tom Cummings

Nadine T. Dennis

Aileen Fearon-Frisz

Kim Ferrarie

Felicia Fields

Phil and Celeste Johnson

Velma G. Lewis

Diana Natalicio

Richard F. Neblett

Charla Oja-Silvia

Shahim Orci

Alfred L. Randall

Ronald F. Roberts

Geraldine Simmons-Bradfield

Iola R. Smith

Arthur Van Clay

Linda Wilson

Laura Zeno

ALU M N I D ONORS

Patron ($1,000 and over)Mario R. Cristancho

Gary S. May

Sponsor ($500 to $999)Johnny M. Bledsoe

Shelton A. Howard

Anthony D. Jackson

William J. Shelmon

Friend ($100 to $499)Juan Cabrera

Matthew Carrillo

Jeffrey Chavez

Weston S. Clarke

Anthony E. Clayvon

Adam A. Corkins

Robert Donaldson

Timothy D. Drinkard

Douglas P. Freyre

Jose A. Gallardo

Rita A. Gonzales

Gustavo D. Gonzalez

Carol Harris

Pamela Leigh-Mack

Melanie Martin

Luis J. Mendez-Mediavil

Carmen D. Oliver

Kendrick P. Patterson

Reynard A. Richards

Clarise A. Shinn

Anthony A. Silva

Karen D. Taylor

Gena Townsend

Lamont Truttling

Gregory M. Wilkins

Eric Williams

Ronald Winder

DONORS

Page 13: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

1110

I NST I T UT IO N AL D ONORS

$500,000 and overDrexel University

$200,000 to $499,999AT&T Foundation

ExxonMobil Corporation

General Electric Company

New Jersey Institute of Technology

Polytechnic University

Rochester Institute of Technology

$100,000 to $199,9993M

Amgen Foundation, Inc.

Booz Allen Hamilton

BP America

Cisco Systems, Inc.

The City College of the City University of New York

Clarkson University

The Dow Chemical Company

General Motors Corporation

Howard University

IBM Corporation

The LisaBeth Foundation

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Northrop Grumman Foundation

Raytheon Company

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

$50,000 to $99,999Agilent Technologies

Alcoa Foundation

The Barkley Fund

Bechtel Corporation

The Boeing Company

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

Cadence Design Systems, Inc.

Chevron Corporation

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

DaimlerChrysler Corporation Fund

Deloitte & Touche LLP

DuPont Company

Eastman Kodak Company

Ford Motor Company

Georgia Institute of Technology

Intel Corporation

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.

Merck & Co., Inc.

North Carolina A&T State University

Pitney Bowes, Inc.

The Pitney Bowes Literacy and Education Fund, Inc.

QUALCOMM Incorporated

Shell Oil Company Foundation

Sony Electronics Inc.

The Starr Foundation

Toyota

University of Colorado at Boulder

Xerox Corporation

$25,000 to $49,999The Ahmanson Foundation

Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

Celestica Corporation

Cravath, Swaine & Moore

International Paper Company Fund

Michigan Technological University

Microsoft Corporation

PACCAR Foundation

Science Applications International Corporation

Siemens Corporation

Texas A&M University

University of Akron

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

University of Missouri-Rolla

$10,000 to $24,999ADC Telecommunications

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

Bucknell University

Fluor Corporation

Genentech, Inc.

Georgia-Pacific Corporation

The Guidant Foundation

Kansas State University

KeySpan Energy

Los Alamos National Laboratory

OPTIMUS Corporation

PPG Industries Foundation

SBC Foundation

Stephen D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation

Symantec Corporation

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

University of Bridgeport

The University of Texas at San Antonio

University of Washington

The UPS Foundation

Virginia Polytechnic University

$5,000 to $9,999Amerada Hess Corporation

American Bureau of Shipping

Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.

Automatic Data Processing Foundation

Bayer Corporation

Caterpillar Foundation

DirectTV

Dominion Resources, Inc.

Energizer Holdings, Inc.

Hertz Corporation

Public Service Electric & Gas Company

Sonalysts

Tennessee Technological University

The University of Texas at El Paso

$1,000 to $4,999Bose Corporation

Candela Corporation

Ceridian Corporation

Consumers Union

Degraw & Associates, P.A.

Geomatrix Consultants, Inc.

Harris Corporation

John Deere Corporation

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kenyon & Kenyon

Mine Safety Appliance Company

Mitretek Systems

Nordson Corporation

Occidental Petroleum Corporation

Temple University

Universal Instruments Corporation

University of California, San Diego

WGBH Educational Foundation

I N D I V I DUAL D ONORS

Founders' Circle ($10,000 and over)Arnold A. Allemang

William P. Dee

James M. Jamieson

Michael L. King

Estate of Mildred Willenbrock

Chairman's Circle ($5,000 to $9,999)Nicholas M. Donofrio

Alvin T. Keith

Harry Longwell

Richard M. Morrow

Lloyd G. Trotter

Benefactor ($2,500 to $4,999)Andrew G. Inglis

James Mahan

Charles E. Redman

J. Stephen Simon

John Brooks Slaughter

Edward S. Taft

William M. Zeitler

Patron ($1,000 to $2,499)Ronald R. Belschner

John E. Bethancourt

Robin Bienfait

Kevin Burke

G. Wayne Clough

John C. Eppolito

Charles L. Gregory

Mary J. Hellyar

Frank Ianna

Willie C. Martin

Michael P. Morley

Deborah L. Morrissett

Hector Motroni

Joseph A. Patt

Tom Price

Scott C. Roberts

David O. Swain

Andrew Valentine

Reginald Van Lee

Gene Washington

Michael J. Weir

Sponsor ($500 to $999)Daryl E. Chubin

Emily H. Deakins

Monica E. Emerson

Michael J. Fister

Courtney Lewis Enslow

John A. Lubbe

Richard J. Martino

Debra Muchow

Donald Newsom

Morris Tanenbaum

Aileen Walter

Phillip T. Woodrow

Wm. A. Wulf

Friend ($100 to $499)Julian M. Babad

Susan R. Bailey

Virginia Cast

Justin Cotton

Tom Cummings

Nadine T. Dennis

Aileen Fearon-Frisz

Kim Ferrarie

Felicia Fields

Phil and Celeste Johnson

Velma G. Lewis

Diana Natalicio

Richard F. Neblett

Charla Oja-Silvia

Shahim Orci

Alfred L. Randall

Ronald F. Roberts

Geraldine Simmons-Bradfield

Iola R. Smith

Arthur Van Clay

Linda Wilson

Laura Zeno

ALU M N I D ONORS

Patron ($1,000 and over)Mario R. Cristancho

Gary S. May

Sponsor ($500 to $999)Johnny M. Bledsoe

Shelton A. Howard

Anthony D. Jackson

William J. Shelmon

Friend ($100 to $499)Juan Cabrera

Matthew Carrillo

Jeffrey Chavez

Weston S. Clarke

Anthony E. Clayvon

Adam A. Corkins

Robert Donaldson

Timothy D. Drinkard

Douglas P. Freyre

Jose A. Gallardo

Rita A. Gonzales

Gustavo D. Gonzalez

Carol Harris

Pamela Leigh-Mack

Melanie Martin

Luis J. Mendez-Mediavil

Carmen D. Oliver

Kendrick P. Patterson

Reynard A. Richards

Clarise A. Shinn

Anthony A. Silva

Karen D. Taylor

Gena Townsend

Lamont Truttling

Gregory M. Wilkins

Eric Williams

Ronald Winder

DONORS

Page 14: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

C312

Arizona State University, Tempe

Bucknell University

California State University, Los Angeles

California State University, Sacramento

The City College of the City University of New York

Clarkson University

Drexel University

Florida International University

Georgia Institute of Technology

Howard University

Kansas State University

Marquette University

Michigan Technological University

New Jersey Institute of Technology

North Carolina A&T State University

North Carolina State University

Polytechnic University

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Rochester Institute of Technology

Temple University

Tennessee Technological University

Texas A&M

University of Akron

University of Bridgeport

University of California, San Diego

University of Central Florida

University of Colorado, Boulder

University of Illinois, Chicago

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

University of Missouri, Rolla

University of Texas, El Paso

University of Texas, San Antonio

University of Washington

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

2004-2005 PARTNER INSTITUTIONS

MICHAEL L . KINGSenior Vice President, Science andTechnologyMerck & Co., Inc.Chairman, NACME, Inc.

JOHN BROOKS SLAUGHTERPresident and CEONACME, Inc.

ER IC A. ADOLPHECEOOPTIMUS Corporation

ARNOLD A. ALLEMANGSenior AdvisorThe Dow Chemical Company

CRAIG R. BARRETTChairman of the BoardIntel Corporation

JOHN E. BETHANCOURTExecutive Vice President, Technology & ServicesChevronTexaco Corporation

ROBIN B IENFAITVice President, GNTS-Network OperationsAT&T

KEVIN BURKEPresident and CEOConsolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

DAVID C . CHANGChancellorPolytechnic University

G. WAYNE CLOUGHPresidentGeorgia Institute of Technology

WILLIAM P. DEE, P.E . , DEEPresident and CEOMalcolm Pirnie, Inc.

FELICIA F IELDSVice President, Human ResourcesFord Motor Company

PATR ICK S . F INNVice PresidentCisco Systems, Inc.

MICHAEL J . F ISTERPresident and CEOCadence Design Systems, Inc.

CHARLES L . GREGORYPresident, Sony Technology Center —PittsburghDeputy President, VTO-America

JAMES W. GR IFF ITHVice President, Materials Engineering and Administration & LegalToyota Technical Center, USA, Inc.

MARY JANE HELLYARPresident, Display and Components and Senior Vice PresidentEastman Kodak Company

ANDREW G. INGLISExecutive Vice President & Deputy Chief Executive, Exploration & ProductionBP p.l.c.

JAMES M. JAMIESONSenior Vice President, Chief Technology OfficerThe Boeing Company

DANIEL B. JULIETTEDirector of Engineering, Metal Fabricating DivisionGeneral Motors Corporation

WILLIAM E. MADISONSenior Vice President, Human Rescources and AdministrationEntergy Corporation

JAMES T. MAHANSenior Vice President3M Corporate Supply Chain Operations

WILLIE C . MARTINPresident—US Region, Vice President,Diversity, Worklife/U.S. Labor Relations/APP/EEODuPont Company

DEBORAH L . MORRISSETTVice President, Regulatory Affairs, Product DevelopmentDaimlerChrysler Corporation

HECTOR MOTRONISenior Vice President and Chief Staff OfficerXerox Corporation

DIANA NATALICIOPresidentThe University of Texas at El Paso

JOSEPH A. PATTIVice President, Human ResourcesBristol-Myers Squibb Company

CHARLES E . REDMANRegion President-Europe, Africa, Middle East and South West AsiaBechtel Limited

SCOTT C . ROBERTSVice President, Chemical ManufacturingShell Chemicals LP

MARK E . RUSSELLVice President, Engineering, Integrated Defense SystemsRaytheon Company

J . STEPHEN SIMONSenior Vice PresidentExxon Mobil Corporation

LLOYD G. TROTTERExecutive Vice President, OperationsGE Consumer & Industrial

REGINALD VAN LEESenior Vice PresidentBooz Allen Hamilton

JAMES C. VARDELL I I IPartnerCravath, Swaine & Moore

JOSEPH E . WALLSenior Vice President and Chief Technology OfficerPitney Bowes, Inc.

GREGORY G. WEAVERChairman and CEODeloitte & Touche LLP

WM. A. WULFPresidentNational Academy of Engineering

WILLIAM M. ZEITLERSenior Vice President and Group ExecutiveIBM Systems Group

JOHN BROOKS SLAUGHTERPresident & CEO

JOHN C. EPPOLITOVice President, Administration & CFO

JOHN A. LUBBEVice President, Resource Development

THOMAS PR ICESenior Vice President, Operations

AILEEN WALTERVice President, Scholar Management

JAMES C. VARDELL, I I ICorporate Secretary, NACMEPartner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

NADINE T. DENNISDirector, Development

JENNIFER GARRICKExecutive Assistant to the President

MELONIA GUTHRIEAdministrative Assistant

ALEX JOHNSONMailroom Administrator

VELMA G. LEWISProgram Manager, Corporate Grants

GREGORY MARINOProgram Manager, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Programs

KEMI OLUWANIF ISEProgram Manager, Scholarship Programs

CAROLINA SANCHEZDirector, Information Technology

NICHOLAS V. TOMASSODirector, Special Events

TRACEY WILSONDevelopment Associate

KEVIN WOLOSHYNDirector, Communications

LAURA ZENOManager, Office Operations

EXECUTIVE ON LOAN

CRAWFORD B. BUNKLEY I I IExxon Mobil Corporation

OFFICERS STAFF

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OFFICERS AND STAFF

MS. ELEANOR BABCOExecutive Director Commission on Professionals in Science andTechnology (CPST)

DR. GARY S . MAYChair, Electrical & Computer EngineeringGeorgia Institute of Technology

DR. JOSE F. MORENOAssistant Professor, Latino/a Education & Policy StudiesCalifornia State University, Long Beach

DR. ROCCO RUSSOPrincipal InvestigatorPresidentRPR Consulting

DR. WATSON SCOTT SWAILPresidentEducational Policy Institute

DR. BEVLEE W. WATFORDProfessor, Associate Dean and Director ofMinority Engineering ProgramsVirginia Polytechnic Institute

RESEARCH AND POLICY ADVISORY COUNCIL

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

High School Graduates

Engineering Eligible

Engineering Admits

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

African American Latino Total American Indian

g NACME Partners

g All Other Schools of Engineering

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G D

EG

RE

ES

AW

AR

DE

D T

O U

RM

s

25%

75%

URM* Engineering Bachelor’s Degrees Awarded, 2004: NACME Partners vs. All Other Schools of Engineering

NACME Partner schools represent a significant portion of enrolled minority students inengineering programs. Working together and sharing best practices, we hope to improveretention-to-graduation substantially for all students pursuing degrees in engineering.

*URM=Underrepresented minority Source: CPST, data derived from EWC

The NACME Research and Policy Advisory Council is comprised of distinguished leaders in their field:

Page 15: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

C312

Arizona State University, Tempe

Bucknell University

California State University, Los Angeles

California State University, Sacramento

The City College of the City University of New York

Clarkson University

Drexel University

Florida International University

Georgia Institute of Technology

Howard University

Kansas State University

Marquette University

Michigan Technological University

New Jersey Institute of Technology

North Carolina A&T State University

North Carolina State University

Polytechnic University

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Rochester Institute of Technology

Temple University

Tennessee Technological University

Texas A&M

University of Akron

University of Bridgeport

University of California, San Diego

University of Central Florida

University of Colorado, Boulder

University of Illinois, Chicago

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

University of Missouri, Rolla

University of Texas, El Paso

University of Texas, San Antonio

University of Washington

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

2004-2005 PARTNER INSTITUTIONS

MICHAEL L . KINGSenior Vice President, Science andTechnologyMerck & Co., Inc.Chairman, NACME, Inc.

JOHN BROOKS SLAUGHTERPresident and CEONACME, Inc.

ER IC A. ADOLPHECEOOPTIMUS Corporation

ARNOLD A. ALLEMANGSenior AdvisorThe Dow Chemical Company

CRAIG R. BARRETTChairman of the BoardIntel Corporation

JOHN E. BETHANCOURTExecutive Vice President, Technology & ServicesChevronTexaco Corporation

ROBIN B IENFAITVice President, GNTS-Network OperationsAT&T

KEVIN BURKEPresident and CEOConsolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

DAVID C . CHANGChancellorPolytechnic University

G. WAYNE CLOUGHPresidentGeorgia Institute of Technology

WILLIAM P. DEE, P.E . , DEEPresident and CEOMalcolm Pirnie, Inc.

FELICIA F IELDSVice President, Human ResourcesFord Motor Company

PATR ICK S . F INNVice PresidentCisco Systems, Inc.

MICHAEL J . F ISTERPresident and CEOCadence Design Systems, Inc.

CHARLES L . GREGORYPresident, Sony Technology Center —PittsburghDeputy President, VTO-America

JAMES W. GR IFF ITHVice President, Materials Engineering and Administration & LegalToyota Technical Center, USA, Inc.

MARY JANE HELLYARPresident, Display and Components and Senior Vice PresidentEastman Kodak Company

ANDREW G. INGLISExecutive Vice President & Deputy Chief Executive, Exploration & ProductionBP p.l.c.

JAMES M. JAMIESONSenior Vice President, Chief Technology OfficerThe Boeing Company

DANIEL B. JULIETTEDirector of Engineering, Metal Fabricating DivisionGeneral Motors Corporation

WILLIAM E. MADISONSenior Vice President, Human Rescources and AdministrationEntergy Corporation

JAMES T. MAHANSenior Vice President3M Corporate Supply Chain Operations

WILLIE C . MARTINPresident—US Region, Vice President,Diversity, Worklife/U.S. Labor Relations/APP/EEODuPont Company

DEBORAH L . MORRISSETTVice President, Regulatory Affairs, Product DevelopmentDaimlerChrysler Corporation

HECTOR MOTRONISenior Vice President and Chief Staff OfficerXerox Corporation

DIANA NATALICIOPresidentThe University of Texas at El Paso

JOSEPH A. PATTIVice President, Human ResourcesBristol-Myers Squibb Company

CHARLES E . REDMANRegion President-Europe, Africa, Middle East and South West AsiaBechtel Limited

SCOTT C . ROBERTSVice President, Chemical ManufacturingShell Chemicals LP

MARK E . RUSSELLVice President, Engineering, Integrated Defense SystemsRaytheon Company

J . STEPHEN SIMONSenior Vice PresidentExxon Mobil Corporation

LLOYD G. TROTTERExecutive Vice President, OperationsGE Consumer & Industrial

REGINALD VAN LEESenior Vice PresidentBooz Allen Hamilton

JAMES C. VARDELL I I IPartnerCravath, Swaine & Moore

JOSEPH E . WALLSenior Vice President and Chief Technology OfficerPitney Bowes, Inc.

GREGORY G. WEAVERChairman and CEODeloitte & Touche LLP

WM. A. WULFPresidentNational Academy of Engineering

WILLIAM M. ZEITLERSenior Vice President and Group ExecutiveIBM Systems Group

JOHN BROOKS SLAUGHTERPresident & CEO

JOHN C. EPPOLITOVice President, Administration & CFO

JOHN A. LUBBEVice President, Resource Development

THOMAS PR ICESenior Vice President, Operations

AILEEN WALTERVice President, Scholar Management

JAMES C. VARDELL, I I ICorporate Secretary, NACMEPartner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

NADINE T. DENNISDirector, Development

JENNIFER GARRICKExecutive Assistant to the President

MELONIA GUTHRIEAdministrative Assistant

ALEX JOHNSONMailroom Administrator

VELMA G. LEWISProgram Manager, Corporate Grants

GREGORY MARINOProgram Manager, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Programs

KEMI OLUWANIF ISEProgram Manager, Scholarship Programs

CAROLINA SANCHEZDirector, Information Technology

NICHOLAS V. TOMASSODirector, Special Events

TRACEY WILSONDevelopment Associate

KEVIN WOLOSHYNDirector, Communications

LAURA ZENOManager, Office Operations

EXECUTIVE ON LOAN

CRAWFORD B. BUNKLEY I I IExxon Mobil Corporation

OFFICERS STAFF

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OFFICERS AND STAFF

MS. ELEANOR BABCOExecutive Director Commission on Professionals in Science andTechnology (CPST)

DR. GARY S . MAYChair, Electrical & Computer EngineeringGeorgia Institute of Technology

DR. JOSE F. MORENOAssistant Professor, Latino/a Education & Policy StudiesCalifornia State University, Long Beach

DR. ROCCO RUSSOPrincipal InvestigatorPresidentRPR Consulting

DR. WATSON SCOTT SWAILPresidentEducational Policy Institute

DR. BEVLEE W. WATFORDProfessor, Associate Dean and Director ofMinority Engineering ProgramsVirginia Polytechnic Institute

RESEARCH AND POLICY ADVISORY COUNCIL

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

High School Graduates

Engineering Eligible

Engineering Admits

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

African American Latino Total American Indian

g NACME Partners

g All Other Schools of Engineering

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G D

EG

RE

ES

AW

AR

DE

D T

O U

RM

s

25%

75%

URM* Engineering Bachelor’s Degrees Awarded, 2004: NACME Partners vs. All Other Schools of Engineering

NACME Partner schools represent a significant portion of enrolled minority students inengineering programs. Working together and sharing best practices, we hope to improveretention-to-graduation substantially for all students pursuing degrees in engineering.

*URM=Underrepresented minority Source: CPST, data derived from EWC

The NACME Research and Policy Advisory Council is comprised of distinguished leaders in their field:

Page 16: “Opening the Pathways to Engineering” that looks like America · g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% g Afr ica n American g Latino g All Other 5.1% 4.5% 90.4% Composition of the Engineering

C4

National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc.

NACME, Inc.440 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 302White Plains, NY 10601-1813

tel 914/539-4010fax 914/539-4032

www.NACME.o rg /05

NACME, a charitable, not-for-profit corporation, welcomes your tax-deductible contribution.Visit www.NACME.org/contribute to support our work today.

National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc.

A graduating class of engineers and an engineering workforce

that looks like America

A N N U A L R E P O R T 2 0 0 5

“Opening the Pathways to Engineering”