Anti-Phishing Working Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710968853
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lexington, MA, USA
Phone
7818624983
Rating
23
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,630
Expenses
$673,463
Assets
$1,334,891
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Jevans (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Peter Cassidy (Secretary): $168,000 total reported compensation
  • Patrick Cain (Director): $37,950 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of APWG is to eliminate internet scams and fraud and to protect consumers by providing a clearinghouse for information.

What it reported doing in 2024

The APWG eCrime eXchange: Automated clearance of cybercrime event machine data related to phishing campaigns and corruption of Internet infrastructure for cybercrimes that is employed for security applications-blocking consumers from reaching criminally controlled points on the Internet and Web and various forensic routine by industrial cybercrime internet interveners law enforcement officials regulators; government agencies including the Internal Revenue Service; and multilateral treaty organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The strongest available result is that the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 39
  • Accountability: 40
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $203K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.