Friends of Iiasa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455352699
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
5085482502
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,848
Expenses
$103,120
Assets
$797,061
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Margaret Collins (Executive Director and Secretary)
  • Roger Levien (President Emeritus)
  • Adil Najam (President, Board of Directors)

Highest reported compensation

  • Margaret Collins (Executive Director and Secretary): $46,000 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 mission of the Friends of IIASA organization (henceforth FoI) is to solicit and distribute funds that will be used to foster and support research on the large problems and challenges facing mankind. In general, the research supported will be conducted at or in association with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), a 501(c)3 organization located in Laxenburg, Austria. FoI also aims to increase collaboration between U.S. scientists and IIASA researchers, and strengthen the connections between members of the IIASA network in the U.S., in order to foster greater engagement between IIASA and the U.S. science and policy communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Friends of IIASA awarded the second Peter de Janosi Visiting Fellowship to Professor Nina Fefferman. Dr. Fefferman visited IIASA in June-July 2024. Along with IIASA colleagues, and organized and took the lead instruction role in IIASA's first Summer School for Systems Modeling.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.73; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $98K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.