Phi Beta Kappa Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526063291
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022653808
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,453,687
Expenses
$2,641,874
Assets
$51,253,829
Liabilities
$1,521,682

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FREDRICK LAWRENCE (SECRETARY/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • FREDRICK LAWRENCE (SECRETARY/CEO): $625,816 total reported compensation
  • AMY MULNIX (COO (THRU 4/1/25)): $219,253 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Organized for the creation of funds or endowments for the promotion of sound learning through the establishment of fellowships, awards & similar items.

What it reported doing in 2024

Awards and fellowships: the mary isabel sibley fellowship is awarded to women scholars every year, alternating between greek and french. The walter j. Jensen fellowship is awarded for at least six months of study in france. The purpose of the fellowship is to help educators and researchers improve education in standard french language, literature, and culture. The dr. Martin r. Lebowitz and eve lewellis lebowitz prizes for philosophical achievement and contribution are awarded to provide significant, tangible recognition for excellence in philosophical thought. The lebowitz symposium program consists of a pair of annual lectures to be delivered sequentially at a division meeting of the american philosophical association selected by the honorees, or lacking their agreement, by the phi beta kappa society. The topic of the lectures is an important philosophical issue of current interest, and the lectures shall ordinarily be chosen to offer contrasting (not necessarily opposing) views on that topic.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.4; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $626K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $381K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.