NORC at the University of Chicago

Legal name: National Opinion Research Center

Overview

Mission

We conduct objective, nonpartisan research and deliver insights that decision-makers can trust.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago is an independent research institution that delivers reliable data and rigorous analysis to guide critical programmatic, business, and policy decisions. Since 1941, norc has conducted groundbreaking studies, created and applied innovative methods and tools, and advanced principles of scientific integrity and collaboration. Today, government, corporate, and nonprofit clients around the world partner with norc to transform increasingly complex information into useful knowledge. Our comprehensive and integrated services span the research cycle and offer solutions that anticipate and address critical needs in research and data science.those services include:. Strategy and planning. Design and methodology. Data collection and management. Analytics and data science. Policy analysis, program implementation and evaluation. Strategic communication and disseminationour areas of research focus include:. Economics, markets, and the workforce. Education, training, and learning. Global development. Health and well-being. Society, media and public affairs

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362167808
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Headquarters
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3127594000
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Social Science

Official website

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.8%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 65.8% of revenue deployed · 67.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $259.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.3M · 32 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $27.1M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 annual filings from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK ANDERSON (TRUSTEE): $3,295,016 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL GAYLIN (PRESIDENT): $1,357,245 total reported compensation
  • KATHERINE BAICKER (TRUSTEE): $1,150,931 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: FY2024.