Continued from page 1
Similarly,
use of long-term goals must relate to
objectives that are more strategic in nature, and related to financial growth projections over
next three to five years. It is at this point that more creativity is needed in
plan design, since NFPs obviously do not have
ability to share wealth or grant equity with members of its senior management team. The award that best fits
requirements should take some form of capital accumulation. The specific design features may vary, but
basics are
same: long-term performance goals are established and monitored. If
performance goals are achieved within
specified period, funds will be set aside into a Rabbi Trust or similar vehicle, which conforms to IRC §457f and 409A. These plans allow monies to be accumulated for
executive until retirement. Although
amounts accumulated under this type of long-term incentive plan will probably not equal
potential value of stock-based plans, it may actually be more consistent with long-term compensation programs in privately owned For Profits, and will certainly go a long way to making
NFP’s executive compensation package more competitive.
What challenges exist in evaluating
NFP executive compensation package for determining reasonableness? An interesting aspect of
difference between evaluation of
NFP compensation package is that elements such as health care benefits, contributions to retirement plans and even
prorated cost of Directors & Officers (D&O) insurance coverage is considered part of
reportable NFP total compensation package, even if it is not taxable to
individual. Among For Profit public companies,
amount and makeup of
executive compensation package is generally available in
various government filings including
proxy reports. Even though SEC regulations require specific items to be reported, preparing these proxies continues to be an art form unto itself; which often masks
true value of
compensation and appears to go out of its way to make reading and interpreting
data difficult, at best. Similarly, disclosure of
comparable required compensation data for NFPs is shown on
IRS Form 990, but is far less definitive and should be carefully scrutinized. The bottom line is that it is much more difficult to accurately make comparisons with other NFPs, which is
main area for judging
reasonableness of
overall compensation package. The regulations currently allow For Profit compensation data to be used when determining
competitive market; this is certainly appropriate since many of
NFP positions are interchangeable between
NFP and For Profit groups. A cautionary note: there are groups in Congress who believe that this “liberal” approach should be curtailed, and only want to allow
use of NFP data in
evaluation of pay.
Why is a Compensation Philosophy important for NFPs? In
world of large For Profits, most have a well-documented Compensation Philosophy that states
company’s intentions vis-à-vis how executives will be paid. This typically includes a discussion of what peers they will use for comparison purposes,
level of competitiveness,
basis for making awards, and
elements to be contained in
executive compensation package. Many mid-sized and smaller For Profits have not yet taken
necessary steps to formalize their pay strategy; this unfortunately is also
case with many NFPs. It is not only important from a business standpoint, but is required in
regulations. One point that needs to be carefully examined is
level of competitiveness that
organization establishes. The most common level for
majority of compensation philosophies and
one that most NFPs strive for is
50th percentile, or “middle of
pack”. It is assumed that this is a safe place to be, and therefore,
easiest to justify. This may be true, but there is nothing that precludes
NFP Board from selecting a higher or lower baseline, particularly if it is consistent with their philosophy, and justified by
overall performance of
organization. In other words, good performance should earn executives fair and competitive pay, while outstanding performance should earn them above market levels of compensation. It all goes back to setting appropriate expectations and standards, and holding
executives accountable for results; and rewarding them accordingly.

Compensation Resources, Inc. provides compensation and human resource consulting to mid-size and Fortune 500 clients as well as public, private, family-owned and emerging companies. CRI specializes in Executive Compensation, Salary Administration, Performance Management, Sales Compensation, and expert witness services. Our reference library boasts over 4,800 surveys.