SPARC Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
332545808
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2026305090
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,068,811
Expenses
$2,585,089
Assets
$6,778,302
Liabilities
$294,580

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Heather Joseph (Executive Director & Board President)
  • Nicholas Shockey (Associate Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Heather Joseph (Executive Director & Board President): $229,034 total reported compensation
  • Valorie Hollister (CFO / COO & Board Treasurer): $175,267 total reported compensation
  • Raymond Crow (Senior Consultant): $142,780 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

SPARC supports open systems for research and education that enable everyone, everywhere to access, contribute to and benefit from the knowledge that shapes our world. We consider openness a critical enabling strategy for achieving such systems.

What it reported doing in 2025

Enabling Systems That Advance Knowledge Sharing - SPARC advances systems that promote open knowledge sharing through targeted work on open business models, content and infrastructure, and community development. SPARC cultivates communities of practice and provides professional development programming for librarians, researchers, university leaders, and the broader public on open research, open education, and related topics through conferences, webinars, and open community forums

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.1%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 71.5%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.1% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $229K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $140K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.