Anyone know? Around 200,000 taking 3 levels which adds up to 200 million of income. The expense should be low as paper and venue don’t cost much
When you join CFAI, you will receive their annual statement every year. Look at the officers’ compensation section you won’t need to ask the question anymore. I do suspect though, that CFAI has to pay the authors of the material every year to include it in the curriculum. Several years ago you actually bought the original text books, so the authors and publishers got their money. I’m sure they didn’t agree to let CFAI include the material in the CFAI texts for free.
I am dumb. For 4 yrs I thought it is a non profit organisation where people volunteered their time
Non-profit Presidents get paid a lot of money! The President of a large university like Ohio, Texas, etc. will probably earn a couple of million or more. The same goes for the Presidents of established organizations like NY Met, opera houses, or even philanthropic organizations. CFAI is probably a bit more money-grubbing than most of these places, but don’t think that just because a place is “non-profit”, the executives are not swimming in money.
It is a common misperception that people work at non-profits for nothing or next to nothing. It is only the entity that is non-profit, not the employees. Some very well known, reputable non-profits pay their officers and directors rather comfortable salaries. The rank and file workers at charitable NFP’s do tend to work for very meager salaries though.
Strange, FRM quietly removed the not for profit title and caused a scandal 10 years ago. I wonder why it did so since the management get paid tons of $$ in CFAI
They should really invest in the local socities and increase networking, promote the value of the designation, or something related. Or else they’re going to end up with 20,000 unemployed charterholders soon.
Non-profit C-level officers can be paid quite a bit. But lower-level non-profits are often exploited almost to the level Wal-mart staff. “Do it for the cause!”
At some level, the argument is similar to the banks: how can we attract qualified managers if we can’t pay them at rates that will keep them from being picked off by higher-paying private sector jobs. I am sympathetic to this argument. High quality non-profit managers do deserve to be able to support their families and live a life more than a scrap above the poverty line. And no one wants non-profit monies completely wasted because managers don’t know how to manage an organization.
At the end of the day, non-profits just should not show a profit that gets kept by “owners.” There is something called “indirect cost recovery” which is basically an overhead charge that goes to the company. ICR isn’t supposed to pad people’s bank accounts, but it can be used for things like organization-strengthening (making new divisions, research, or creating a capital cushion for hard times). I’m not sure how one determines those things, but it’s probably similar to CAPEX expenditures and accounting in the private sector.
The other thing is that non-profits actually ARE allowed to make profits under the law. They are just required to pay tax on them (religious organizations are a special category). The non-profit distinction is primarily about the ability of donors to donate funds to the organization and deduct them as charitable giving on their own taxes; it is not primarily about how non-profits don’t have to pay taxes (even though many do not).
Making profits, even if legal and taxed, does affect a non-profit’s public image, however. Donation-based non-profits lose credibility and donors, and non-profits that seek to do foundation or goverment funded projects get eyed suspiciously if profits are anything more than token-level.
^ the easiest way to avoid profits is to increase officer comp. I do agree though that NFP’s need to be able to attract talent and money is usually the best way to do that. The pool of people who are capable of running a large organization and are willing/able to do it for free is pretty small.