The Rust Foundation

Legal name: Rust Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
854376974
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dover, DE, USA
Phone
3022197361
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,274,907
Expenses
$4,810,306
Assets
$3,881,934
Liabilities
$1,115,804

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA RUMBUL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA RUMBUL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $410,351 total reported compensation
  • WALTER PEARCE (SECURITY ENGINEER): $368,058 total reported compensation
  • JOEL MARCEY (DIRECTOR OF TECHNOLOGY): $267,960 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Rust Foundation is a non-profit membership organization dedicated to supporting the infrastructure, maintenance, and innovation of the Rust programming language, an open-source systems programming language focused on safety, speed, and concurrency.

What it reported doing in 2025

The rust foundation exists to support the rust project and ecosystem, to ensure that the rust programming language is robust and fit for purpose. During 2025 the foundation continued to support the maintenance of the rust language infrastructure (employing two engineers to work on the efficiency, sustainability and security of this critical infrastructure) and invested in two program management roles within the open source project. The foundation achieved a 75% ci cost reduction, and secured over $2 million of donated cloud computing services. $439,000 of financial awards were made to support volunteer maintainers and work to improve the language.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 63
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 23rd 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $410K · 25 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.