Institute for State Policy Leaders

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880815255
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
7036841110
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$751,071
Expenses
$855,038
Assets
$122,530
Liabilities
$299,786

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE RAUSCHENBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • NEAL OSTEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MAX BEHLKE (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • STEVE RAUSCHENBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • DEB PETERS (SECRETARY-TRASURER)
  • FELIX ORTIZ (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The institute for state policy leaders was created to assist state policymakers in making informed policy decisions by conducting nonpartisan educational programming. Continued on sch o

What it reported doing in 2023

Tax academy policy seminars in 2023, the institute held two tax academy policy seminars june 22-23, 2023 and november 17-18, 2023 in arlington, va and amelia island, fl, respectively as part of the institutes new initiative to educate state legislators about the intricacies of tax policy. As tax policy is an integral part of government because they not only influence behavior, they fund the government itself. And just as the 21st century has posed the challenges in other areas of government, states are now grappling with how to adapt their tax systems in the ever connected national and global economies. While much debate remains on what to tax and how to tax it, policymakers agree that our tax systems should not serve as an impediment to economic growth and the remittance and collection of taxes should be seamless for taxpayers. Cont. On sch. O

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.45; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $664K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.