Opc Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742793815
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
4804836644
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,282,513
Expenses
$4,951,254
Assets
$2,255,171
Liabilities
$333,859

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAN BEZDICEK (DIRECTOR)
  • MATTHIAS DAMM (DIRECTOR)
  • ANDREAS FAATH (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation is dedicated to ensuring interoperability in automation by creating and maintaining open specifications that standardize the communication of acquired process data, alarm and events, records historical data and batch multi-vendor enterprise systems

What it reported doing in 2025

Education and information activities: the foundation facilitates the exchange of information among interested parties to enhance the further collaboration of technical specifications for the opc interfaces. The foundation provides training seminars for members and the general public as well as facilitating demonstrations at trade shows of uses of the standards. The foundation publishes newsletters to inform the industry and the public about the state of engineering, application and developments concerning the technology

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 66% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.8% of revenue deployed · 62.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.