National Foundation For Autism Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200538863
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8586798800
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntary Health Associations & Medical Disciplines N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,075,570
Expenses
$1,940,824
Assets
$2,487,868
Liabilities
$510,977

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Sharon Leon (Executive Dir.): $169,916 total reported compensation
  • Juan F Leon (Chairman): $164,535 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The National Foundation for Autism Research (NFAR) is dedicated to improving the lives of autistic individuals by empowering them with equitable opportunities that promote independence, inclusion, and lifelong success, thereby strengthening the communities we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

According to the CDC, autism affects 1 in 31 persons in the U.S. today, equating to more than 30,000 individuals in San Diego. And yet, only 15 of this population can find and secure employment. Since 2015, NFAR has been opening doors to competitive, integrated employment for those with autism and helping those with barriers to employment gain economic mobility and stability. We do this through our comprehensive, autism-specific, vocational training programs, NFAR Works, NFAR Tech, and NFAR IT/Cyber, with certifications and work experiences that help prepare individuals for entry-level jobs in the fields of office and manufacturing environments, software testing, and cybersecurity industries that offer opportunities for professional growth and advancement, benefits and more. Employment is so much more than a paycheck. Employment provides a way to become more self-reliant and start realizing their dreams, and opens up opportunities for professional growth and developing a social network of coworkers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 70.4%; rating input score 70; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 6.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.6% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $170K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.