International Foundation for Art Research Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
132623376
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2023
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2123916234
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$177,948
Expenses
$500,121
Assets
$486,262
Liabilities
$4,924

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LINDSEY SCHNEIDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDSEY SCHNEIDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $221,043 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Educational and research organization dedicated to integrity in the visual arts. Ifar is concerned with issues of attribution/authenticity, provenance, theft, ownership, and other scholarly, legal and ethical issues involving art objects.

What it reported doing in 2025

Authentication and researchsince its founding in 1969, ifar has offered an art authentication research service to provide the public with scholarly, objective, and unbiased research and opinions on works of art whose attribution is in question or whose existence is unknown to specialists in the field. As a nonprofit organization that neither buys, sells, nor appraises artworks for monetary value, ifar has no vested interest in the outcome of its research. The service is available to museums, other institutions, galleries, and individuals, but they must be the owners of the artworks or their authorized representatives. Ifar conducts provenance and other research on artworks, and they are also examined by specialists. If warranted, scientific tests are also performed. At the end of its research, ifar issues a written report for the owner detailing its findings. Ifar reserves the right to publish its research, and over the years, has been responsible for exposing numerous art fraud scams and discovering many previously unknown artworks.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 43%; rating input score 43
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -181%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 43% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $215K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $221K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.