CFA Institute Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
546063408
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Charlottesville, VA, USA
Phone
4349515499
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,529,556
Expenses
$841,442
Assets
$23,038,972
Liabilities
$171,572

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET FRANKLIN (BOARD MEMBER): $1,489,299 total reported compensation
  • KIMBALL E MAYNARD (TREASURER): $295,595 total reported compensation
  • WALTER V HASLETT JR (EXEC. DIRECTOR/BOARD MEMBER (END 8/2023)): $125,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Member value programs: cfa institute research foundation sponsored, published, and distributed research that contributed to the global body of knowledge that investment professionals around the world use in their day-to-day practice. The foundation also offered complimentary access to investment information services for investment professionals, including cfa institute members. Over the past year, the foundation published: i. Financial entrepreneurship ii. Optimal design of life-cycle funds in emerging market countries. Iii. A comprehensive guide to etfs (2nd edition) iv. De-risking global pension systems v. Macroeconomic drivers of stocks and bonds vi. Stocks for the long run? New evidence, old debates

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 27.38; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.2% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $740K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.5M · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.