Quatt Associates develops customized executive compensation packages for a wide variety of not-for-profit clients. Our executive compensation recommendations are consistent with legal standards, which include the IRS Intermediate Sanctions regulations, as well as the expectations of the organization’s supporters, funders, and other stakeholders. To meet the IRS standards we base our recommendations on rigorous, in-depth market analysis. Our studies draw on our extensive proprietary database, which we supplement with IRS form 990 data and published data from both local and national surveys. We then develop a customized compensation package. The mix between base salary and other compensation is based on consultation with the organization and the CEO. Recommendations for bonuses or incentives are tied to organizational strategy and performance objectives.
Designing and updating organization-wide compensation systems is a cornerstone of our practice. We craft compensation structures customized to each client’s organizational culture and strategic objectives.
Our approach starts with understanding what the client wants to achieve through its compensation system. We first work with the client to develop a clear compensation philosophy, and then carefully analyze the market, working with the client to understand the appropriate market comparators, the nature of the organization’s work, and the role of each position in the organization.
Based on this analysis we then develop clear and comprehensible compensation structures consistent with best practice, both in the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors.
Our compensation systems are dynamic and adaptable.
Quatt Associates regularly prepares intermediate sanctions analyses of executive pay in order to protect our clients—and their Boards—from IRS penalties. We carefully compare compensation to the appropriate marketplace in order to ensure that executive compensation is consistent with IRS and other legal standards. We then provide not-for-profit Boards with the detailed compensation comparison they need in order to take advantage of the IRS regulations’ rebuttable presumption of reasonableness, which provides a partial safe harbor for Board members from IRS penalties.