Center for Islamophobia Studies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473611429
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5109146722
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$570,923
Expenses
$487,522
Assets
$427,282
Liabilities
$217,053

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Hatem Bazian (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Hani Kharufeh (Secretary): $36,000 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 the Center for Islamophobia Studies is to develop a sustained response that both examines the roots of Islamophobia and provides the empirical data to quantify the problem. The Center is focused on developing the tools required to educate policymakers on how best to counter Islamophobia.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, the organization made significant strides in advancing the global conversation on Islamophobia. It published two complete volumes of the Islamophobia journal, hosted two international conferences in France, and co-organized and hosted another major conference in Bosnia. In addition, it organized 30 workshops across the United States, fostering dialogue and education on Islamophobia in diverse communities. Representatives also participated in a prominent roundtable on Islamophobia and antisemitism, provided strategic advice to several elected members of Congress, and engaged with students and faculty during visits to college campuses across the U.S. and Europe.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.8%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.6%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.8% of revenue deployed · 31.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $153K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 27/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.