Institute for Security and Technology
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475677755
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Oakland, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4153207208
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,587,978
- Expenses
- $4,436,894
- Assets
- $4,644,862
- Liabilities
- $237,490
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PHILIP REINER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- PHILIP REINER (CEO): $366,425 total reported compensation
- MEGAN STIFEL (CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER): $298,432 total reported compensation
- STEVEN KELLY (CHIEF TRUST OFFICER): $229,830 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
A nonprofit public benefit corporation that educates the public on issues related to global security and provides a trusted technology and policy lab for mitigating emerging security threats in commercially viable and internationally beneficial ways.
What it reported doing in 2024
Future of digital security (internet security): continued work with a coalition of industry and government partners to mitigate the threat posed by ransomware and other ecosystem wide cybersecurity threats. This pillar of thematic work is named 'future of digital security.'innovation and catastrophic risk (catalink and nuclear weapons): technical solution to reduce nuclear risk by providing a secure reliable dedicated crisis communications capability, expanded a public unclassified baseline body of knowledge on nuclear command, control, and communications through convening global experts, adding deepened knowledge on the impact of technologies like deep learning. This pillar of thematic work is named 'innovation and catastrophic risk.'geopolitics of technology (future digital threats to democracy): works to identify and define future potential threats to democracy posed by digital systems, aiming to derive solutions to ensure the resilience of democratic institutions. This pillar of thematic work is named 'geopolitics of technology.'
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -23.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 31.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 38.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 30.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 37.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $366K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.