Realdania

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
980606302
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Copenhagen, DA, DA
Phone
4570116666
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$314,700,000
Expenses
$234,992,764
Assets
$4,643,300,000
Liabilities
$659,500,000

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

Leadership & pay

123 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESPER NYGARD (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESPER NYGARD (CEO): $804,313 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH LILLELUND WINTHER (CIO): $447,635 total reported compensation
  • NINA KOVSTED HELK (DIRECTOR FOR PHILANTHROPY): $447,326 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Realdania støtter projekter, der skaber værdi for mennesker gennem det byggede miljø – både lokalt og nationalt.

What it reported doing in 2024

* strategic association goals for the present and future generation *realdania's primary strategic goal is to make a difference for people now and in the future. To further this strategic goal, realdania aims to keep its equity stable with a long-term investment horizon and, in realdania's philanthropic work, the organization enters into long-term projects with potentially difficult agendas. One such example, among many, is the blox development project. Blox has transformed a previously abandoned part of copenhagen into a lively forum for urban living that forges connections between the residents of copenhagen harbour and stimulates interest in architecture, design, and sustainable urban development through exhibitions, events, business development, and new partnerships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.8%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.3%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.76; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 54.8% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 99 of 110 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $172.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $804K · 123 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.4M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 123 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.