National Funeral Directors Association of the United States Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
390978598
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Brookfield, WI, USA
Phone
2627891880
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,925,628
Expenses
$10,307,605
Assets
$22,999,589
Liabilities
$4,941,539

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON (PRESIDENT)
  • DAN FORD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • DOUGLAS NIE (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTINE REICHELT-PEPPER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • JEDD LAPID (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FUNERAL SERVICES FOUNDATION)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINE REICHELT-PEPPER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $508,743 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER FARMER (GENERAL COUNSEL): $335,140 total reported compensation
  • LESLEY WITTER (SR VP, ADVOCACY): $270,391 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The national funeral directors association is the world's leading, largest and most trusted association to support funeral professionals. We provide our members with critical information, innovative tools, resources and the professional community they need to serve families, run sustainable businesses and become pillars in their communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

The national funeral directors association provides general services to its members such as a website, member service representatives (call center), promotion of public awareness, advocacy, and member benefit programs (human resources consulting, credit card services, etc.), and improves industry services. Approximately 21,000 members were served during the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 79% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 35.3%; rating input score 35; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 30%; rating input score 30; 6th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 5.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.23; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 3 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $509K · 21 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.