Edward M Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270963869
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6177407000
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,567,114
Expenses
$8,331,907
Assets
$117,301,008
Liabilities
$49,015,026

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM HINDS (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ADAM HINDS (CEO): $312,489 total reported compensation
  • PAMELA PEAK (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT): $178,890 total reported compensation
  • JOHN FOX (DIRECTOR OF IT): $156,064 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The edward m. Kennedy institute for the united states senate is dedicated to educating the public about the important role of the united states senate in our system of government, encouraging participatory democracy, invigorating civil discourse, and inspiring the next generation of citizens and leaders to engage in the civic life of their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024 we dramatically expanded our democracy programs-including through three major partnerships with the institutes of former republican senators as we work to reduce division in our politics and governing institutions, we expanded our vertical civics offerings with growing numbers from states across the country, completed to rebuild of our award winning senate immersion module, and grew the number of public events focused on speakers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.08; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $312K · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $615K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.