Us Sif Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222989704
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028725361
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$639,256
Expenses
$1,006,050
Assets
$1,032,571
Liabilities
$320,146

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIA LETTINI (CEO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER))

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIA LETTINI (CEO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)): $314,385 total reported compensation
  • BRYAN MCGANNON (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $184,381 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The us sif foundation's mission is to rapidly shift investment practices towards sustainability, focusing on long-term investment and the generation of positive social and environmental impacts. It undertakes educational, research and programmatic activities in support of us sif: the forum for sustainable and responsible investment, its sole member.

What it reported doing in 2025

Promotion and education of sustainable and responsible investing (sri), the publication of research reports and other resources, and professional educational courses, seminars and forums relating to the concept of sustainable and responsible investing and practice.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 44
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 54.8%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -57.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 54.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $551K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.