Cfa Society Chicago

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362595074
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3122511301
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,621,643
Expenses
$1,802,076
Assets
$2,969,996
Liabilities
$1,631,569

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER VINCENT (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER VINCENT (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $240,716 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN HURLEY (DIR OF PROGRAMMING/SPONSOR): $142,532 total reported compensation
  • SUZANNE KARPICK (MANAGING DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION): $69,406 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cfa society chicago, the world's first investment analysts' society, is committed to working with our members and the investment community to achieve our mission through three organizational pillars: (1) deliver member value: deliver industry-leading events focused on continuing education and professional development. Offer a range of networking opportunities to our members. Implement new technology and build a digital content library. (2) develop future professionals: measure our engagement with top employers of cfa charterholders and improve these scores over time. Build brand awareness through marketing, social media, and partnerships. (3) build market integrity: support financial literacy in our community through partnerships and volunteer opportunities. Build relationships with local universities and support students who are studying for or considering the cfa exams. Encourage a diversity of gender, race, and thought.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cfa society chicago partners with the economic awareness council and the greenwood project to shape the investment industry and serve the greater good by sharing financial literacy volunteer opportunities for cfa members to teach inner city high school students the basics of savings and investments and to mentor minority college students and to introduce them to careers in the finance industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -11.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $241K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.