American Council for Capital Formation Center for Policy Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521091172
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022935811
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Finance, Taxation, Monetary Policy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$408,827
Expenses
$426,666
Assets
$608,869
Liabilities
$499,575

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK A BLOOMFIELD (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PINAR CEBI WILBER (CHIEF ECONOMIST & EXEC VP): $134,610 total reported compensation
  • HAMIDEH KASHANINEJAD (TREASURER): $113,326 total reported compensation
  • MARK A BLOOMFIELD (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR): $104,537 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 mission of the accf center for policy research is to promote u.s. Economic growth, provide high quality jobs, and compete effectively in world markets through its economic research and policies.

What it reported doing in 2025

Research and special project: in 2025, the accf center for policy research funded research on the proxy advisory firms and the importance of loans programs office for the us energy sector. The accf-cpr examined the economic impact of federal tax and regulatory legislation for the u.s. As a whole. The accf cpr sponsored several economic policy evenings and webinars on retirement policy, tax policy, energy policy, trade and on the general economic trajectory of the u.s. Economy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.3%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 33.9%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.43; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -18.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.3% of revenue deployed · 33.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $144K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.