Are you tired of hearing, "That nonprofit pays its employees too much!" If every nonprofit board followed IRS guidance on setting the compensation of its key staff leaders, perhaps we wouldn’t hear that refrain as often. So board members, please do your part by embracing your role as defenders of the nonprofit sector’s right to pay its employees reasonably and fairly. Help us change the conversation from, "What compensation is excessive?" to "What compensation levels will help our organization build its capacity by hiring and retaining terrific staff?"
First, know the process for reviewing the annual compensation of the executive director. Second, be aware of the downside of NOT engaging in an annual compensation review. (Bad press, lack of donor confidence, and potentially IRS penalties….need we say more?)
Background: Under federal law, a charity may not pay more than "reasonable" compensation for services rendered. Although the Internal Revenue Code does not require charities to follow a particular process for determining the appropriate level of salary and benefits, it is clear that compensation for board members, officers, key employees (and others in a position to exercise substantial influence over the affairs of the nonprofit) should be determined by persons who are informed about what comparable nonprofits pay their employees, and who have no financial interest themselves in approving the compensation. (Source: IRS, Governance and Related Topics - 501(c)(3) Organizations 3-4 (2008)). These are the general guidelines offered by the IRS – but the IRS Form 990 offers specifics.
First, know the process for reviewing the annual compensation of the executive director. Second, be aware of the downside of NOT engaging in an annual compensation review. (Bad press, lack of donor confidence, and potentially IRS penalties….need we say more?)
Background: Under federal law, a charity may not pay more than "reasonable" compensation for services rendered. Although the Internal Revenue Code does not require charities to follow a particular process for determining the appropriate level of salary and benefits, it is clear that compensation for board members, officers, key employees (and others in a position to exercise substantial influence over the affairs of the nonprofit) should be determined by persons who are informed about what comparable nonprofits pay their employees, and who have no financial interest themselves in approving the compensation. (Source: IRS, Governance and Related Topics - 501(c)(3) Organizations 3-4 (2008)). These are the general guidelines offered by the IRS – but the IRS Form 990 offers specifics.
The IRS Form 990 asks nonprofits about the three-step process used to approve the compensation of the executive director/CEO (and certain other key employees): Did the process for determining compensation of the following persons include a (1) review and approval by independent persons, (2) comparability data, and (3) contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision?(See Section VI, Part B, line 15, of the Form 990.) Nonprofits that follow this three-step process are generally able to take advantage of what the IRS refers to as a "rebuttable presumption" that the compensation is reasonable, thereby protecting the nonprofit and the board members from sanctions that can be imposed by the IRS if it finds that the compensation was not reasonable.
Visit the National Council’s website for more information on how to measure comparability of compensation, and visit the IRS website for background on what can happen if a board fails to demonstrate it followed this 3-step rebuttable presumption process [hint: intermediate sanctions].
Demonstrating that your nonprofit has approved the compensation of the executive director/CEO in a thoughtful, deliberative process is a basic fiduciary responsibility of every nonprofit board. Here are some pointers:
Demonstrating that your nonprofit has approved the compensation of the executive director/CEO in a thoughtful, deliberative process is a basic fiduciary responsibility of every nonprofit board. Here are some pointers:
- The process of reviewing executive compensation should recur whenever there is an adjustment to the executive director/CEO’s compensation.
- Having a written policy can help keep the process on track. ( See sample policy).
- The "executive compensation review" should be conducted by persons who are "independent" (not paid by the nonprofit). Many nonprofits use a sub-committee, such as a "compensation committee" made up of board members and volunteers, or the executive committee, to conduct the initial review and then make a recommendation to the full board.
- Having the full board approve the compensation of the executive director/CEO is consistent with being a transparent and accountable organization.
- Documentation of what the board’s decision was based on (such as comparability data) and of the fact that the board carefully deliberated and approved the CEO’s compensation is critical. Minutes of the meeting should include enough details so that if the board’s decision is questioned, the process the board used to determine that compensation is "reasonable" will be clear.
- "Compensation" means both salary and benefits, so if an executive director receives a salary but also other fringe benefits such as insurance, or a car or housing allowance, all those elements must be totaled together to determine the annual compensation.
Read about additional governance policies that your nonprofit’s board should be aware of.
No comments:
Post a Comment