Congressional Black Caucus Foundation

Legal name: Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521160561
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
202.263.2800
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Minority Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,889,171
Expenses
$22,237,489
Assets
$27,335,566
Liabilities
$1,454,942

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

Leadership & pay

43 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • NICOLE AUSTIN-HILLERY (PCEO): $376,836 total reported compensation
  • PAUL DUMARS (CFO): $310,586 total reported compensation
  • DONNA FISHER LEWIS (VP OF DEVELOPMENT): $302,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advance the global Black community by developing leaders, informing policy, and educating the public.

What it reported doing in 2025

Leadership institute/cpar the congressional black caucus foundation, inc, (cbcf) leadership institute offers a myriad of programs aimed at building the next generation of leaders to include internships, fellowships, scholarships, and study abroad programs. Opportunities are provided to african american emerging leaders interested in gaining the first-hand experience in public policy making as well as duly committed to addressing social inequalities among underserved groups. Internships are offered in the spring and fall and the summer along with professional development leadership training. Fellowships are for 20-months allowing young professionals to gain experience working on capitol hill in both member offices, the house and senate committees. Scholarships are provided to high school qualified students and continuing education college students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.5%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 42.4%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.4%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.1%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 36.5% of revenue deployed · 42.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 37 of 38 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $377K · 43 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.