FORUM Credit Union

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
350779057
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Indianapolis, IN, US
Phone
317-558-6299
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Credit Unions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$144,668,455
Expenses
$119,619,367
Assets
$2,173,451,335
Liabilities
$1,907,079,088

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS TRUE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • JIM CARR (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT - COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT SERVICES)
  • CHRISTOPHER FERGUSON (VICE PRESIDENT-CONSUMER LENDING)
  • BRIAN CRUM (VICE PRESIDENT - REAL ESTATE, SERVICING AND CREDIT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUGLAS TRUE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $790,523 total reported compensation
  • BENJAMEN BANKS (FINANCIAL ADVISOR- PCG): $479,609 total reported compensation
  • JEFFRY WELCH (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $442,889 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Forum is a 501(c)(14) exempt organization that is operated for mutual purposes and without profit that 1)promotes thrift among members and 2)provides low cost credit for members. Its collective charge is to be an innovative, dynamic, and responsive financial services organization providing products and services that create value for its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

To promote thrift and responsible use of credit within the membership, forum provides several financial education opportunities including financial literacy content on the website, financial literacy videos, financial seminars, online budgeting tools, in branch activities and promotions geared to financial education. In addition, forum provides a variety of innovative savings accounts designed to encourage systematic savings which has generated over $27 million in personal savings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 92% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 17.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.17; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $791K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.2M reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.