Allegheny Institute for Public Policy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 251704173
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Phone
- 4124400079
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Printing, Publishing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $609,170
- Expenses
- $703,652
- Assets
- $2,551,773
- Liabilities
- $25,376
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAKE HAULK (PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
- FRANK GAMRAT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- FRANK GAMRAT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $183,016 total reported compensation
- ERIC MONTARTI (RESEARCH DIRECTOR): $166,114 total reported compensation
- COLIN MCNICKLE (COMMUNICATIONS AND MARKETING DIRECTOR): $134,739 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The allegheny institute is a non-profit research and education organization. Our mission is to defend the interests of taxpayers, citizens, and businesses against an increasingly burdensome and intrusive government. To that end, we will formulate and advocate public policies that roll back the size and scope of local government, as well as create a more accountable government. Our efforts will be guided by the principles of free enterprise, property rights, civil society, and individual freedom that are the bedrock upon which this nation was founded.
What it reported doing in 2025
Develop and promote solutions to economic and societal challenges throughout western Pennsylvania through reports, educational luncheons, and research projects.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.1%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -15.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.63; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 77.9%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95.1% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $544K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.