Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions

Legal name: Center for the Study of Democratic Institution

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954829141
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3106983400
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,961,517
Expenses
$3,081,882
Assets
$20,660,111
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Robert J Abernethy (Chairman of the Board)
  • Andrei Cherny (Director)
  • Steve Huffman (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To foster and encourage dialogues, discussions and contributions in public health, democracy, and human rights; and to contribute to youth education in art and music in Los Angeles County

What it reported doing in 2024

Fostering and encouraging dialogues, discussions and contributions in democracy, by (1) providing financial support for the operations, activities and the quarterly publication of the nonpartisan journal Democracy, A Journal of Ideas; (2) hosting conferences, events, trainings and other symposia attended by a wide variety of public and private figures who are thought leaders in this area; and (3) contributing to various like-minded charitable organizations in support of their efforts to facilitate greater understanding of these issues. Major gifts in these areas have gone to Democracy, A Journal of Ideas, Human Rights Watch and to the Center for Constitutional Studies and Democratic Development at Johns Hopkins University.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -57.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.7; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 21 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.