Openid Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260447503
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Ramon, CA, USA
Phone
9252756639
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,153,018
Expenses
$1,944,854
Assets
$2,700,378
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GAIL HODGES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • NAT SAKIMURA (CHAIRMAN & DIRECTOR (COMMU)
  • DIMA POSTNIKOV (VICE-CHAIR & DIRECTOR (COR)
  • MARIE JORDAN (SECRETARY & 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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Founded in 2007, the openid foundation (oidf) is a nonprofit open standards body developing identity and security specifications that serve billions of consumers across millions of applications. The openid foundation's vision is to help people assert their identity wherever they choose, and our mission is to lead the global commmunity in creating identity standards that are secure, interoperable, and privacy-preserving.

What it reported doing in 2024

2024 strategic initiatives: oidf is a founding member of the sustainable and interoperable digital identity (sidi) hub. Interoperability is crucial for a fair and inclusive digital society. By coordinating the digital identity activities already underway abnd defining a governance structure for digital structure for digital identity credentials, the sidi hub is helping accelerate the path to cross-border interoperabibility.in march 2024, at the gartner identity and access management summit in london, industry leaders showcased successful, interoperable implementations of the shared signals framework (ssf) and continuous access evaluation profile (caep). This included okta, sailpoint, and cisco as well as security startups sgnl, vericlouds, and hilisoft. The ssf suite of standards underpins zero-trust architectures and promises to enable a more secure digital future for everyone.oidf authzen working group announced in may 2024 that select leading authorization vendors successfully achieved conformance with the authzen request/response protocol, marking a significant step in bringing interoperability and standardization to the authorization market. The industry leaders include 3edges, aserto, axiomatics, cerbos, permit.io, rock solid knowledge, sgnl.ai, strata identity, and thales, demonstrating their commitment to documenting common authorization patterns, defining standard mechanisms for communication between authorization components and recommending best practices for developing secure applications.as part of oidf's open banking ecosystem outreach and support efforts in 2024, oidf responded to the consumer financial protection board (cfpb) in the u, s regarding the 1033 rule focused on personal financial data rights in the u, s. Oidf followed up its formal response with an open letter in may 2024 in light of submissions by other commenters and subsequent discussions with parties in the ecosystem, oidf then summarized its guidance ot the cfpb in a blog post in july 2024 that noted oidf is responding to a call from those seeking to enhance the security of u, s. Digital infrastructure.on june 18,2024, oidf's executive director, gail hodges, spoke about digital identity at the g20 in brazil during the digital government and inclusion workshop.oidf announced in september 2024 that it is one of 15 parties to a collaborative research and development agreement (crada) with the national cybersecurity council center of excellence. This project will accelerate digital identity adoption in the united states. Its first use case supports financial institutions to meet their know-your-customer requirements using mobile drivers license (mdl) technologies and standards.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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: 50
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 20 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $951K reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.