International Foundation for Ethical Research Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222628153
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3124276065
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$409,060
Expenses
$174,387
Assets
$1,528,054
Liabilities
$3,690

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH KANDARAS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH KANDARAS (PRESIDENT): $91,583 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance the development and implementation of human-relevant, non-animal alternatives in research, testing and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Bmes: the biomedical engineering society is a professional organization dedicated to advancing engineering solutions to biomedical challenges. Bmes' relevance to ifer's mission lies in the fact that the work of biomedical engineers has contributed mightily to the development of devices, such as organs-on-a-chip, that mimic bodily functions. Thus, while not all biomedical engineers focus on replacing animals in research, the work of many in this field dovetails with researchers who are seeking to replace animals in research. Sponsoring and exhibiting at the bmes conference bears directly on ifer's effort to align itself with scientists whose work contributes to the replacement of animals in research.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.1%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 56th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.76; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.1% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $92K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.