Harvard Global Research and Support Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454535664
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6174961889
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,829,025
Expenses
$12,222,397
Assets
$6,843,702
Liabilities
$2,247,350

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SEAN CARON (PRESIDENT, TREASURER, AND DIRECTOR)
  • MEREDITH WEENICK (FORMER PRESIDENT, TREASURER, AND DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEREDITH WEENICK (FORMER PRESIDENT, TREASURER, AND DIRECTOR): $882,830 total reported compensation
  • ALINA PAYNE (DIRECTOR OF ITALIAN STUDIES): $704,746 total reported compensation
  • KLARA JELINKOVA (DIRECTOR): $622,435 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 corporation is organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended. Specifically, the corporation has been formed for the benefit of president and fellows of harvard college ("harvard university") in order to conduct, support and facilitate educational and research activities within and outside of the united states, and to receive grants from organizations, including government agencies located within and outside of the united states.

What it reported doing in 2024

Harvard Global continued to operate by supporting research, collaborations, and education activities in India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, South Africa, Switzerland, Tunisia, and the United Kingdom. In addition, Harvard Global provided research services in the United States to support Harvard University's mission.

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 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -3.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.8% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $883K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $3.6M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 219 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.