Kestrel Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942750021
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6504936871
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,874,883
Expenses
$3,443,324
Assets
$4,556,619
Liabilities
$1,756,279

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CORDELL GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CHIEF)
  • ERIC SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARCEL BECKER (COMPUTER SCIENTIST): $330,189 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN FITZPATRICK (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER &): $274,963 total reported compensation
  • ERIC SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $263,063 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Kestrel institute performs research on methods and tools for software assurance - using mathematical models and properties of algorithms and data structures to ensure that software performs predictably and reliably. Our research is communicated to the wider academic community through journals, conferences and technical meetings. Our tools are used by u.s. And international universities. We occasionally host students for brief periods to work on projects aligned with our research interests.

What it reported doing in 2024

Afrl fight tonight:-----------

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 11.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 56.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $330K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $808K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.