Comparative and International Education Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341414606
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4126481832
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,113,766
Expenses
$1,188,904
Assets
$2,998,901
Liabilities
$1,012,888

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HALLA HOLMARSDOTTIR (PRESIDENT)
  • KAZUO KURODA (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • SANGEETA KAMAT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN ROBETSON (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • M NAJEEB SHAFIQ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • HALLA HOLMARSDOTTIR (PRESIDENT)
  • KAZUO KURODA (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • SANGEETA KAMAT (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The comparative and international education society, inc. Was founded in 1956 to foster cross-cultural understanding, scholarship, academic achievement and societal development through the international study of educational ideas, systems, and practices.

What it reported doing in 2025

Membership & publications - the society publishes the "comparative education review", the leading journal in the field. Each year the journal receives about 200 submissions from scholars around the globe, undertakes further review of about half the submitted manuscripts, and publishes approximately twenty articles and 20-30 book reviews in its four quarterly issues. The journal's standing is confirmed by high citation rates and a good impact factor. In addition, a newsletter is produced for electronic circulation several times each year. The newsletter has at its purpose the dissemination of news about the society's work and the work of its members, fostering exchange on issues internal to the society and for the field at large.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.3%; rating input score 90; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.52; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.4% of revenue deployed · 63.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $752K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 19 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $444K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.