Internet Security Research Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463344200
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
5103458489
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,563,960
Expenses
$7,925,896
Assets
$6,887,136
Liabilities
$1,777,065

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSHUA AAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • SARAH GRAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSHUA AAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $397,706 total reported compensation
  • SARAH GRAN (VICE PRESIDENT): $269,445 total reported compensation
  • AARON GABLE (ENGINEER): $225,235 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To protect internet users by lowering monetary, technological, and informational barriers to a more secure and privacy-respecting internet.

What it reported doing in 2024

Let's encrypt - isrg develops, operates, and maintains software-based systems and services that can issue free digital certificates in a fully automated fashion for use in establishing encrypted communication channels over the internet. These systems are designed specifically to serve those who have little to no knowledge of how the underlying technology works, and who cannot afford to pay for the necessary services or expertise.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $398K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.