The Fund for American Studies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136223604
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029860384
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,597,054
Expenses
$17,878,468
Assets
$27,614,893
Liabilities
$5,193,717

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROGER R REAM (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT J CALLAHAN (CFO/VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCE)
  • STEPHEN SLATTERY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EDWARD TURNER (VICE PRESIDENT, DEVELOPMENT)
  • THOMAS TUCKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - FTE)
  • SHANE MAZZELLA (VICE PRESIDENT, US PROGRAMS)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROGER R REAM (PRESIDENT): $406,982 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN SLATTERY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $240,894 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT J CALLAHAN (CFO/VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCE): $223,469 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

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.8%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th 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: 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: -14.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.8% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $14.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $318K reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 43 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 20 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.