PMI Educational Foundation

Legal name: Project Management Institute Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232630701
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Newtown Square, PA, USA
Phone
6103564600
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,305,998
Expenses
$5,994,596
Assets
$6,106,259
Liabilities
$842,814

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PIERRE LE MANH (PMI PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ASHLEY FORSYTH (PMIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PIERRE LE MANH (PMI PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,614,382 total reported compensation
  • OLIVER LAZAR (PMIEF CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $345,518 total reported compensation
  • ASHLEY FORSYTH (PMIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $235,772 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth-serving nonprofits: launched in 2012, the pm knowledgeable youth program initially focused on getting project management and project-centered education integrated into the curricula for 13-to-19-year old students globally. It is the cornerstone initiative of the foundation's programs and activities and is being used as the labortory in which the foundation countines to build and invest in distintive capabilities. Over the years, as the program shifted focus from pilot to scaling globally, the foundation extended into primary school education.as a result of the newly implemented strategy focusing on youth-severing non-profits, the foundation cultivated long-term relationships with nonprofits across the globe to help them integrate project management into their youth programs and to build their own project management capability. This provides greater value and impact to youth and the nonprofit organizations that serve them, while also leveraging the youth-focused work the foundation has accomplished over the past seven years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $60.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 38th 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: Fail
    • 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: 17.9%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.