The Niskanen Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 455308952
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2028991166
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,958,495
- Expenses
- $10,357,724
- Assets
- $12,043,190
- Liabilities
- $2,381,671
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOSEPH COON (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
- TED GAYER (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- TED GAYER (PRESIDENT): $682,937 total reported compensation
- KRISTEN DE PENA (VP FOR POLICY): $276,973 total reported compensation
- JOSEPH COON (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $272,135 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Established in 2014, the niskanen center is a 501(c)(3) think tank that works to change public policy through direct engagement in the policymaking process: developing and promoting proposals to legislative and executive branch policymakers, building coalitions to faciliate joint action, and marshaling the most convincing arguments in support of our agenda.
What it reported doing in 2024
Niskanen's legal work encompasses litigation, participation in administrative proceedings, commenting on proposed regulations, formulating legislative proposals, and writing on pressing energy issues. We hold government leaders, agencies, and large corporations accountable for a just energy transition by advocating for fair, market-driven energy development. Our legal team has worked on many cases concerning gas markets, climate, and eminent domain law.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.1%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.1% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $683K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $425K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.