The Rotary Foundation
Legal name: The Rotary Foundation of Rotary International
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 363245072
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Evanston, IL, USA
- Phone
- +1 866-976-8279
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $462,635,498
- Expenses
- $392,946,470
- Assets
- $1,719,960,646
- Liabilities
- $105,618,487
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
31 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN HEWKO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN HEWKO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $852,448 total reported compensation
- MICHELE BERG (DEPUTY GENERAL SECRETARY): $552,063 total reported compensation
- JULIE BURKE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $510,706 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Rotary Foundation helps Rotary members to advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace by improving health, providing quality education, improving the environment, and alleviating poverty.
What it reported doing in 2024
Polioplus - the polioplus program is rotary's effort to eradicate the poliovirus worldwide. Rotarians have provided financial support and countless volunteer hours to ensure that children are immunized against this crippling disease and that surveillance of the virus is strong, despite the poor infrastructure, extreme poverty, and civil strife of many countries. Funds support national immunization days, poliovirus transmission monitoring, and other efforts in polio-endemic, recently endemic, and high risk countries. Rotary is a core partner in the global polio eradication initiative, along with the world health organization, unicef, the cdc, and the gates foundation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- 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 some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- 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: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.5%; rating input score 99; 35th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.1%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.38; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $337M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $852K · 31 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 11 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: 341 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 328 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.