ISACA Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834605433
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Schaumburg, IL, USA
Phone
8472531545
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,773,866
Expenses
$1,394,828
Assets
$3,479,642
Liabilities
$1,869,006

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erik Prusch (PRESIDENT, Secretary, DIRECTOR & ISACA CEO)
  • Meeghan Ward Creeden (Executive Director (Through October 2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • Erik Prusch (PRESIDENT, Secretary, DIRECTOR & ISACA CEO): $1,309,415 total reported compensation
  • Thomas Kyei-Boateng (TREASURER & CFO): $865,105 total reported compensation
  • Meeghan Ward Creeden (Executive Director (Through October 2024)): $592,717 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide opportunities for under-represented individuals to enter security professions and support the advancement of untapped talent into leadership positions.

What it reported doing in 2024

The ISACA Foundation celebrates expanding the Digital Trust Workforce Expansion Program in 2024 to create opportunities for underrepresented and economically disadvantaged communities. * The Digital Trust Workforce Expansion Program, which serves underserved populations, expanded to eight US cities in partnership with the Caterpillar Foundation * The Digital Trust Workforce Expansion Program provided education (free certification training, mentorship, career support, and connections to internships) to 163 learners * Nearly 9 in 10 Digital Trust Workforce Expansion Program participants (87%) come from diverse backgrounds * Paid out US$20,900 in stipends to participants in the Workforce Expansion Program to provide further career support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 60.3%; rating input score 60; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.4%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.49; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.3M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.