The American Institute of Afghanistan Studies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
432017217
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6173584648
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$467,026
Expenses
$148,506
Assets
$690,628
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS BARFIELD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • OMAR SHARIFI (COUNTRY DIRE): $27,000 total reported compensation
  • MAHDI SUROSH (COUNTRY DIRE): $25,000 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA KOKKINOS (ASST. U.S. D): $24,750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve research and advanced study of afghanistan and its region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Presidents report since the closing of the kabul office closed, aias has had to reorient where its money would go. The amount of fellowships has significantly increased as aias is able to dedicate more funding for fellowships and decided to fund research on afghanistan from within the u.s. Instead of afghanistan. Dr. Barfield shared who the 2024-2025 fellowship recipients were. All awards are noted in the year in review report. Aias granted 1 caorc awards and 6 aias-funded awards. This year was a higher number of awards than previous years due to being able to obligate more funding to fellowships than programming. Aias tries to be as wide as possible in terms of the type of research it is funding and can return to the conversation of whether or not to support research from within afghanistan. Dr. Barfield shared that in the near future, he would like to discuss the possibility of funding research travel grants to afghanistan again or research from within afghanistan again.we still do not support any research within afghanistan and until conditions are safer, do not plan to jepardize the safety of any scholar to do so.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.7%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 54.1%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 68.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.65; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.7% of revenue deployed · 54.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.