Open Philanthropy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810737472
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6508047100
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,803,010
Expenses
$7,291,034
Assets
$21,641,481
Liabilities
$116,782

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARI TUNA (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • ALEXANDER BERGER (CEO/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID ROODMAN (SENIOR ADVISOR): $355,934 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER YOUNGS (SENIOR PROGRAM OFFICER): $344,371 total reported compensation
  • JAMES SNOWDEN (SENIOR PROGRAM OFFICER): $315,939 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 mission of open philanthropy is to study and to engage in research analyzing the most promising options for ensuring that philanthropy has a lasting impact on improving the lives of as many people as possible.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization engages in study and research to develop data and new insights to assist philanthropic organizations and the general public improve the effectiveness and impact of their own giving. Through study and research, the organization is gaining learning and experience about the causes across philanthropic categories, including direct aid, research and development, and policy advocacy, so that future giving will have the broadest and most meaningful long-term impact on the lives of as many people as possible.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.3%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • 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: -304.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.97; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -41.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $356K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $467K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.