CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

A

CBO

PAPER

JULY 2003

Comparing the

Pay of Federal

and Nonprofi t

Executives:

An Update

JupiterImages

CBO

A

P A P E R

Comparing the Pay of Federal and

Nonprofit Executives: An Update

July 2003

The Congress of the United States # Congressional Budget Office 
Notes

Unless otherwise indicated, all federal salaries referred to in this paper include locality-pay

adjustments.

Numbers in the text and tables may not add up to totals because of rounding.
Preface

This paper continues the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) series of analyses of the

federal government’s compensation practices. More specifically, it updates comparisons of

salaries for federal and nonprofit executives. The paper was prepared at the request of the

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs’ Subcommittee on Oversight of

Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia. In keeping

with CBO’s mandate to provide objective and nonpartisan analysis, the report makes no

recommendations. 

R. Mark Musell of CBO’s Microeconomic and Financial Studies Division wrote this paper

under the supervision of Roger Hitchner. Paul Cullinan, Deborah Clay-Mendez, Ellen Hays,

Arlene Holen, and Bob Sunshine of CBO provided helpful comments. The report also benefited from the comments of L. Elaine Halchin and Sharon S. Gressle of the Congressional

Research Service. The author notes with appreciation the suggestions and data provided by

Bob Heim and others at the Office of Personnel Management. 

Christine Bogusz edited the paper, and Christian Spoor proofread it. L. Rae Roy typed drafts

of the manuscript, and Sharon Corbin-Jallow prepared the paper for publication. Lenny

Skutnik produced the printed copies, and Annette Kalicki produced the electronic versions for

CBO’s Web site (www.cbo.gov).

Douglas Holtz-Eakin

Director

July 2003

Contents

Summary and Introduction 1

Pay for Federal Executives 2

The Executive Schedule 2

The Senior Executive Service 2

Comparing Pay for Federal and Nonprofit Executives 5

Conclusions and Limitations 7

Appendix

Detailed Results of the Pay Comparisons 9
vi COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

Tables

1. Distribution of Awards and Bonuses Among Members

of the Senior Executive Service, 2002 5

A-1. Comparison of Salaries for Federal and Nonprofit Executives, 2002 10

A-2. Comparison of Salaries and Bonuses for Federal and Nonprofit

Executives, 2002 11

Figures

1. Distribution of SES Employees by Salary, 2002 3

2. Distribution of SES Employees by Salary, Including

Awards and Bonuses, 2002 6

3. Median Salaries for Federal and Nonprofit Executives, 2002 7

Boxes

1. The Recommendations of the National Commission

on the Public Service 2

2. Awards and Bonuses Available to the SES 4
Comparing the Pay of Federal and

Nonprofit Executives: An Update

Summary and Introduction

One of the many issues addressed in a recent report

from the National Commission on the Public Service

(also referred to as the Volcker Commission) is the salaries of government executives. Most federal executives

fall into one of two groups: political appointees under

the Executive Schedule and members of the Senior

Executive Service (SES). Appointees covered by the

Executive Schedule hold positions at the top levels of

government, such as Cabinet secretary and agency

director. Members of the SES are managers and

supervisors, most of whom have career appointments

for which they have competed. Many SES members

have had careers in the federal government. SES

employees rank just below appointees covered by the

Executive Schedule and just above the employees paid

according to the General Schedule—the pay plan that

applies to most rank-and-file federal white-collar

workers. One of the Volcker Commission’s recommendations was that salaries for top federal officials be

commensurate with those earned by executives of

leading nonprofit organizations (see Box 1).

Executive compensation has also been the subject of

several Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports. A

1999 analysis by CBO showed that pay and benefits for

federal executives were well below those for most executives in private firms.1

 In contrast, compensation for

federal executives exceeded compensation for all but the

highest-level positions at the largest nonprofit organizations. This report updates the comparisons of compensation for federal and nonprofit executives. It covers

salaries and bonuses but not health insurance, retirement, and other benefits. Data were not available to

update information on benefits or the comparisons

covering some of the largest nonprofit firms. Nevertheless, this analysis expands on comparisons included in

the Volcker Commission’s report by considering salary

levels for a wider variety of top-level positions in a

broader range of nonprofit firms. 

Like the comparisons from CBO’s earlier report, those

presented here show that salaries for federal executives

generally exceed salaries for executives of nonprofit organizations, except executives holding the top position

(chief executive officer) in the largest organizations.

That finding suggests that the results of salary comparisons may vary by level of executive position. 

Although pay comparisons can provide useful information, the data that underlie CBO’s analysis have limitations that caution against generalizing the results. For

example, the data do not represent a random selection

of nonprofit firms. Forming a full picture of how federal pay compares with other pay requires data from a

range of nonprofit jobs and firms that is sufficient to

mirror the range of jobs and levels of responsibility held

by federal executives. Even with more extensive data,

however, pay comparisons alone may not indicate the

competitiveness of salaries for federal executives. If the

government is attracting and retaining the top executives it needs, then federal pay may be competitive regardless of how it stacks up against other organizations’

compensation. 1. Congressional Budget Office, Comparing the Pay and Benefits of

Federal and Nonfederal Executives (November 1999).
2 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

Box 1.

The Recommendations of the National

Commission on the Public Service

The January 2003 report of the 11-member National

Commission on the Public Service recommended

dramatic changes in federal personnel practices. The

commission was convened under the sponsorship of

the Brookings Institution’s Center for Public Service

to address several concerns, including a loss of public

trust in government, the need to ensure a supply of

talented citizens for careers in public service, poor

morale among federal employees, and the absence of

clear policy direction and high standards of performance in many agencies. The commission, chaired

by Paul Volcker, came roughly 14 years after the first

Volcker Commission, whose recommendations were

a major impetus for the locality-pay system that currently governs the salaries of many white-collar federal employees. The commission’s latest report made

a number of major recommendations:

# Reorganize the federal government into a limited

number of mission-related agencies,

# Change committees in the House and Senate to

align with the new federal organization,

# Reduce the number of political appointees and

streamline the process by which they are appointed,

# Split the Senior Executive Service into technical

and professional corps,

# Raise salaries for top federal executives to levels

comparable with those for executives in nonprofit organizations,

# Give agencies more independence in setting pay

and tying raises more closely to job performance,

and

# Simplify the recruitment process for federal jobs.

The commission based its recommendations on research, analysis, and testimony from many sources,

including the Congressional Budget Office. 

Pay for Federal Executives

The combined payroll of the Executive Schedule and

the Senior Executive Service currently totals about $1

billion. Although each group has its own pay plan and

method of adjusting salaries, the salaries for the two

groups are linked to each other and to salaries for various other executives, including Members of Congress

and judges.

The Executive Schedule

Most of the 446 top officials who were covered by the

Executive Schedule in 2002 were appointed by the

President. The schedule has five pay levels, which this

year range from a low of $125,400 at level V (administrators, deputy directors, and others) to a high of

$171,900 at level I (Cabinet-level posts).2

 Salaries for

Members of Congress and many judges have traditionally equaled level II of the Executive Schedule. Raises

for executives covered by the schedule, as well as for

Members of Congress, judges, and other top government officials, most often occur when the Congress

permits annual increases based on changes in the employment cost index (ECI).3

 In the past five years, salaries have been increased four times. Those annual pay

raises have ranged from 2.7 percent to 3.4 percent. 

The Senior Executive Service

Members of the SES hold a wide range of high-level

positions throughout the government, in areas such as

budgeting, policymaking, science, engineering, and

program administration. In many cases, SES members

are assistants or deputies who report to executives covered by the Executive Schedule; in other cases, they lead

major organizations. Career employees make up about

90 percent of the SES, and political appointees account

for the rest. As of March 2002, SES employees numbered 6,996.

2. The other salaries are $134,000 at level IV, $142,500 at level

III, and $154,700 at level II.

3. Specifically, pay raises are based on changes in the part of the

ECI that measures wages and salaries for private industry minus

0.5 percentage points. The Congress can also pass special legislation authorizing pay raises for executives, or it can adopt raises

on the basis of recommendations from selected commissions

appointed to study top-level salaries in government. 
 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE 3

 110- 

 114

 115- 

 119

 120- 

 124

 125- 

 129

 130- 

 134

 135- 

 139

 140- 

 144

 145- 

 149

 150- 

 154

 155- 

 159

 160- 

 164

 165- 

 169

 170- 

 174

 175- 

 179

180+

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

Salary (In thousands of dollars)

Figure 1.

Distribution of SES Employees by Salary, 2002

(Number of executives)

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by the Office of Personnel Management.

Note: SES = Senior Executive Service.

Salaries for the SES and Links to the Executive Schedule. SES salaries are set at one of six basic rates, which

ranged as of January 2003 from $116,500 at level 1 to

$134,000 at level 6. The government adjusts those basic rates (as it does for many other federal employees) to

reflect local labor-market conditions. Because of such

locality adjustments, salaries for members of the SES

who work in Washington, D.C., for example, range

from $129,874 at level 1 to $142,500 at level 6.4

 Although pay raises for the Senior Executive Service occur

largely at the discretion of the President, SES members

have received raises in each of the past five years, ranging, in Washington D.C., from 3.1 percent to 4.9 percent.

Salaries in the Executive Schedule serve as caps on the

amounts payable to members of the Senior Executive

Service. The highest base pay in the SES, for example,

may not exceed level IV of the Executive Schedule

($134,000 in 2003); pay with locality adjustments may

not exceed level III of the Executive Schedule

($142,500). Total annual compensation for SES members, including awards and bonuses, is capped at level I

($171,900). Provisions in the Homeland Security Act

allow an agency to raise that cap to the level of the Vice

President’s salary (currently $198,600) pending certification of the agency’s performance management plan

by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

Amounts awarded in excess of a cap are paid in a lump

sum in the calendar year following the one in which the

award was received.

Pay Compression in the SES. The Volcker Commission

and other observers have called attention to two conse4. Salaries in Washington, D.C., are $136,006 at level 2 and

$142,137 at level 3; at levels 4, 5, and 6, all salaries are capped

at $142,500. 
4 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

Box 2.

Awards and Bonuses Available to the SES

Federal agencies use various awards and bonuses to

reward members of the Senior Executive Service

(SES) for outstanding performance and to recruit,

retain, and relocate employees. 

 

Performance Awards

Agencies may award a lump-sum payment of between 5 percent and 20 percent of basic pay to career

members (as opposed to political appointees) of the

SES to recognize their excellent performance over a

one-year period. The total amount awarded cannot

exceed 10 percent of the total base pay for the agency’s career SES members for the prior year.

Awards for Special Acts

An agency or the President may reward members of

the SES for special acts, suggestions, or inventions

that improve the functioning of the federal government. Those awards range from $10,000 to $25,000.

Rank Awards

The President may make two types of awards to career members of the SES who demonstrate consistently excellent performance over an extended period.

The Distinguished Executive award provides a lumpsum payment of 35 percent of the recipient’s base

pay. No more than 1 percent of SES members may

receive that award. The Meritorious Executive award,

given to no more than 5 percent of SES members,

provides a lump-sum payment of 20 percent of the

recipient’s base pay. 

Retention Bonuses

Agencies may pay up to 25 percent of an SES employee’s basic pay to encourage him or her to stay in

public service. Such a lump-sum payment is given

when the high or unique qualification of the employee or a special need of the agency makes retaining

the employee essential. 

Relocation Bonuses

An SES employee who must relocate to a different

commuting area in order to accept a position that has

been difficult to fill may receive a lump-sum payment of up to 25 percent of his or her basic pay.

Recruitment Bonuses

An SES employee who accepts a position that has

been difficult to fill may receive a lump-sum payment of up to 25 percent of his or her basic pay.

quences of the links between the Executive Schedule

and the SES pay system. First, SES employees whose

salaries are at or near the caps in the Executive Schedule

do not always get the raises they might otherwise receive. Second, the salary caps have compressed the SES

pay scale, resulting in little difference among pay levels.

In 2002, about two-thirds of SES members earned the

same capped salary of $138,200 (see Figure 1 on page

3). Pay compression occurs because salaries for Members of Congress and top officials, which serve as caps

on SES pay, have been increased by lower amounts

—and less often—than have salaries for SES members.

Raises for the Executive Schedule are based on the ECI,

but raises for the SES may include an ECI-based raise

and a locality adjustment. As a result, over time, an increasing share of SES pay is determined by limits in the

Executive Schedule.

Managers, policy experts, and others have expressed

concern that pay compression and restricted pay raises

may hinder efforts to recruit and retain executives, reduce morale among members of the SES, and lessen

employees’ incentives to perform at the highest levels.

To address those concerns, the Congress has introduced

legislation that would change the SES pay system. The

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year

2004 (H.R. 1588) would establish a broad range of pay

for the SES, replacing the current schedule of six discreet salaries and setting higher caps on salaries. In

Washington, D.C., for example, the cap on base pay

would increase from level IV of the Executive Schedule

(currently $134,000) to level III ($142,500).

Awards and Bonuses for the SES . Some relief from the

impact of pay compression may already be provided by
 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE 5

Table 1.

Distribution of Awards and Bonuses Among Members 

of the Senior Executive Service, 2002

Percentage of

SES Employees

Receiving

Award

Total Awards

in Millions

of Dollars

Total Awards

as a Percentage

of SES Payroll

Average

Award

in Dollars

Average

Percentage

Increase in Pay

for Recipients

Performance Awards 41 29.8 3.7 12,100 8.8

Awards for Special Acts 11 2.7 0.3 4,000 2.9

Rank Awards 2 3.6 0.4 27,900 20.2

Retention Bonuses 1 1.6 0.2 23,800 17.3

Relocation Bonuses * 0.4 0.1 16,800 12.4

Recruitment Bonusesa 0 0 0 00

Total 52b 38.1 4.7 11,300 8.3

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by the Office of Personnel Management.

Note: * = between zero and 0.05 percent.

a. The data system employed by OPM to prepare the information that CBO used for this analysis did not report the small number of recruitment bonuses for 2002.

Including that information would not substantially change the results reported here.

b. The total is smaller than the sum of the numbers above because employees who received more than one award were counted only once in the total.

the current system of awards and bonuses for the SES.

Career SES members may receive various awards in

recognition of outstanding performance (see Box 2).

Like other federal employees, they also may receive bonuses tied to recruitment, retention, or relocation. For

2002, 52 percent of career SES members received some

bonus or award; 5 percent received more than one

award. Those awards totaled $38.1 million, or roughly

4.7 percent of SES payroll (see Table 1). Performance

awards granted by agencies in recognition of excellent

work over a year accounted for the bulk of the money

awarded. About 41 percent of SES members earned

such an award in 2002, down from 53 percent in 2000

and 52 percent in 2001. The average amount awarded

in 2002 for performance was $12,100, a figure that has

varied little over the past several years.

Although awards and bonuses do not substitute for a

basic salary schedule that offers variations in pay to

match significant differences in levels of work and qualifications, they do allow the government to offer a

range of compensation far wider than that indicated by

salaries alone. Data from OPM show that when awards

and bonuses are taken into account, earnings of SES

members who are judged by their supervisors to be

good performers rise dramatically. In 2002, awards and

bonuses raised the earnings of about half of the SES to

levels above that year’s capped rate of $138,200; for

some SES members, earnings in 2002 reached as high

as $200,000 (see Figure 2). Some SES employees receive

awards frequently. About 75 percent of the SES members employed for the past three years earned at least

one award during that period. Twenty-nine percent

received awards in two of the past three years, and

roughly 23 percent earned an award in all three years.

Comparing Pay for Federal and

Nonprofit Executives

The Volcker Commission’s report recommended that

pay for top government executives be linked to pay for

executives of leading nonprofit firms. The commission

argued that nonprofit pay offered a reasonable standard

for setting pay in public service and that raises pegged
6 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

 110- 

 114

 115- 

 119

 120- 

 124

 125- 

 129

 130- 

 134

 135- 

 139

 140- 

 144

 145- 

 149

 150- 

 154

 155- 

 159

 160- 

 164

 165- 

 169

 170- 

 174

 175- 

 179

180+

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

Salary with Awards and Bonuses (In thousands of dollars)

Figure 2.

Distribution of SES Employees by Salary, Including Awards and Bonuses, 2002

(Number of executives)

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by the Office of Personnel Management.

Notes: SES = Senior Executive Service.

Awards and bonuses are shown in the year in which they were awarded rather than the year in which they were paid. Amounts awarded in excess of a cap

on total compensation are paid in the following calendar year.

to nonprofit levels were needed to restore fairness and

to improve federal agencies’ ability to recruit and retain

executives. According to the commission’s report, average salaries for the heads of large labor unions, private

foundations, public interest groups, and other types of

nonprofit organizations generally exceed salaries for

Members of Congress, district judges, deputy secretaries, heads of major agencies, and others paid at level II

of the Executive Schedule ($150,000 at the time of the

report).

CBO’s updated comparisons expand on those prepared

by the Volcker Commission in a number of ways. First,

they present information on salaries and bonuses for

five executive-level positions—not just the top position.

(The five positions are chief executive officer, chief financial officer, chief administrative officer, head of personnel, and regional manager.) Second, rather than focus solely on average salaries at leading nonprofit firms,

CBO examined the salary range for each position in

nonprofit firms of different types and sizes. CBO’s

broader approach encompasses nonprofit positions that

mirror more of the types of jobs and levels of responsibility held by federal executives. (The appendix to this

paper provides detailed results of the pay comparisons.)

Consistent with the Volcker Commission’s findings,

CBO’s comparisons (both old and new) show that the

salaries of most federal executives are below those of

top executives at the largest nonprofit firms for which

data were available (see Figure 3). The median salary for

chief executive officers at nonprofit organizations with

annual budgets of $25 million or more was about

$176,800 in 2002, whereas the median salary for fed-
 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE 7

SES EX CEO CFO Manager CEO CFO Manager

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Type of Executive Position

Federal Government

All Nonprofit Organizations

Large Nonprofit Organizations

Figure 3.

Median Salaries for Federal and Nonprofit Executives, 2002

(In thousands of dollars)

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by the Office of Personnel Management.

Notes: SES = Senior Executive Service; EX = Executive Schedule; CEO = chief executive officer; CFO = chief financial officer.

Salaries exclude awards and bonuses. Large nonprofit organizations are those with annual budgets of $25 million or more. Managers are defined as

regional managers.

eral executives was $138,200. However, federal salaries

compare favorably with most other salaries included in

the comparisons. When nonprofit organizations of all

sizes (rather than just large ones) are considered, the

median salary of federal executives exceeds that of nonprofit executives. Federal salaries also outstrip salaries

for other types of executive positions—even in large

nonprofit firms. For example, the median salary for

chief financial officers of large nonprofit organizations

was about $98,000 in 2002, far below the federal median of $138,200. Many of those positions are closer

matches to federal executive positions than are the top

jobs that were the exclusive focus of the Volcker Commission. These results extend to comparisons that include bonuses and awards received by federal and nonprofit executives.

These comparisons do not take into account benefits

such as health insurance and retirement pensions. An

earlier study by CBO found that federal benefits are

often higher than those offered by firms outside the

government.5

 Including benefits in the comparisons

could make federal compensation look better relative to

compensation in nonprofit organizations. 

Conclusions and Limitations

Readers should use caution in generalizing the results

presented here. The data on salaries come from Abbott,

Langer, and Associates of Crete, Illinois, an employee5. Congressional Budget Office, Comparing Federal Employee Benefits with Those in the Private Sector (August 1998).
8 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

compensation consulting firm. Like data from many

commercial sources, their information does not come

from a random selection of firms. Rather, many of the

respondents are probably clients of Abbott, Langer, and

Associates. For that reason, results based on such information may not be representative of all nonprofit organizations. Furthermore, although the comparisons of

federal and nonprofit compensation expand on those

conducted by the Volcker Commission, they may not

apply to all federal executive positions. Even the largest

nonprofit firms have operations much smaller than

those of many federal agencies. Also, the nonprofit positions may not be appropriate comparisons for many

federal executives with different jobs. Even for positions

with similar titles, duties and responsibilities may vary

widely among federal agencies and between government and private organizations.

Notwithstanding those qualifications, the comparisons

show—consistent with the findings of the Volcker

Commission—that federal executive pay is low compared with salaries for the top jobs at large nonprofit

organizations. Such jobs and firms, however, may be an

appropriate basis of comparison only for top-level federal executives. When CBO looked at other nonprofit

positions and firms—which may more closely correspond to federal positions other than the top ones—it

found that federal salaries were comparatively high.

That analysis suggests that salary comparisons may vary

by level of position—a finding consistent with the results of other analyses by CBO. Studies focusing on

rank-and-file white-collar workers, for example, find

that lower-ranking clerical and technical jobs may earn

more in the federal government than similar jobs earn

in private firms. By contrast, higher-ranking professional and administrative jobs may earn less than comparable private-sector jobs (in some cases, the salaries

can differ by 20 percent or more).6

Even with better data, salary comparisons can be misleading.7

 If the government is attracting and retaining

the top executives it needs, then pay may be competitive. The data used in this analysis do not allow CBO

to draw firm conclusions about how federal salaries and

benefits compare with a nonprofit benchmark or how

they serve to attract employees to careers as executives

in public service. But this paper and other work by

CBO suggest the need to examine a wide range of data

before reaching broad conclusions about the adequacy

of compensation for federal executives.

6. Congressional Budget Office, Measuring Differences Between

Federal and Private Pay (November 2002) and Comparing

Federal Salaries with Those in the Private Sector (July 1997).

7. See Congressional Budget Office, What Does the Military ‘Pay

Gap’ Mean? (June 1999).
APPENDIX

Detailed Results of the Pay Comparisons

This appendix presents detailed results of the

Congressional Budget Office’s comparisons of salaries

for federal and nonprofit executives. The comparisons

cover five executive positions and nonprofit organizations of different types and sizes. Table A-1 presents

comparisons of salaries; Table A-2 presents comparisons that include executives’ awards and bonuses as well

as salaries.
10 COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE

Table A-1.

Comparison of Salaries for Federal and Nonprofit Executives, 2002

(In dollars)

Selected Nonprofit Positions Federal Positions

Salary Levela

Chief

Executive

Officer

Chief

Financial

Officer

Chief

Administrative

Officer 

Head of

Personnel

Regional

Manager

Senior

Executive

Service

Executive

Schedule

All Nonprofit Organizations

High 110,239 90,000 71,999 64,820 66,417 138,200 138,200

Medium 79,397 68,973 51,750 51,501 51,273 138,200 130,000

Low 56,179 52,000 39,000 45,000 45,000 137,901 130,000

Large Nonprofit Organizations as Defined by Annual Budget 

Budget of $25 Million or More

High 237,296 120,881 63,945 77,807 60,415 138,200 138,200

Medium 176,833 97,690 37,636 66,400 54,793 138,200 130,000

Low 107,842 79,733 33,950 52,874 47,457 137,901 130,000

Large Nonprofit Organizations as Defined by Size of Workforce

100 to 249 Employees

High 150,000 106,275 83,800 68,250 79,951 138,200 138,200

Medium 100,000 70,000 58,718 51,204 63,093 138,200 130,000

Low 78,500 58,033 49,504 41,500 57,000 137,901 130,000

250 or More Employees

High 167,483 96,394 79,721 68,000 65,581 138,200 138,200

Medium 122,500 78,147 54,925 57,631 58,820 138,200 130,000

Low 93,687 64,474 37,040 44,700 50,187 137,901 130,000

Nonprofit Organizations, by Type 

Professional and Trade Groups

High 156,000 118,492 94,737 92,870 n.a. 138,200 138,200

Medium 107,749 90,000 59,866 67,107 n.a. 138,200 130,000

Low 76,937 68,995 46,027 58,592 n.a. 137,901 130,000

Educational Groups

High 156,000 112,136 n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 138,200

Medium 107,749 86,667 n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 130,000

Low 76,937 69,880 n.a. n.a. n.a. 137,901 130,000

Foundations

High 175,000 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 138,200

Medium 97,500 94,650 n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 130,000

Low 71,000 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 137,901 130,000

Health Care Groups

High 99,440 80,830 70,621 56,577 57,000 138,200 138,200

Medium 82,000 60,720 56,050 45,500 50,000 138,200 130,000

Low 65,802 51,906 46,852 38,348 43,805 137,901 130,000

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by Abbott, Langer, and Associates, Inc. 

Note: n.a. = not available.

a. “High” indicates the salary at the 75th percentile, “average” is the median salary, and “low” is the salary at the 25th percentile.
COMPARING THE PAY OF FEDERAL AND NONPROFIT EXECUTIVES: AN UPDATE 11

Table A-2.

Comparison of Salaries and Bonuses for Federal and Nonprofit Executives, 2002

(In dollars)

Selected Nonprofit Positions Federal Positions

Salary Levela

Chief

Executive

Officer

Chief

Financial

Officer

Chief

Administrative

Officer

Head of

Personnel

Regional

Manager

Senior

Executive

Service

Executive

Schedule

All Nonprofit Organizations

High 115,925 92,000 76,234 67,800 67,017 148,200 138,200

Medium 81,000 69,000 55,125 52,330 51,558 138,200 130,000

Low 58,000 53,372 43,375 40,000 44,860 138,200 130,000

Large Nonprofit Organizations as Defined by Annual Budget

Budget of $25 Million or More

High 263,750 123,825 n.a. 83,000 60,843 148,200 138,200

Medium 173,451 95,348 n.a. 70,028 55,180 138,200 130,000

Low 114,945 78,000 n.a. 52,832 47,157 138,200 130,000

Large Nonprofit Organizations as Defined by Size of Workforce

100 to 249 Employees

High 160,816 108,543 84,304 72,325 79,989 148,200 138,200

Medium 102,852 70,000 60,650 56,650 63,093 138,200 130,000

Low 77,968 57,706 49,750 42,287 59,840 138,200 130,000

250 or More Employees

High 163,305 100,000 90,925 69,554 67,192 148,200 138,200

Medium 120,000 80,556 72,354 58,021 59,194 138,200 130,000

Low 95,137 65,125 49,575 49,176 49,180 138,200 130,000

Nonprofit Organizations, by Type 

Professional and Trade Groups

High 185,000 124,502 n.a. 94,020 n.a. 148,200 138,200

Medium 114,400 97,817 61,698 71,587 n.a. 138,200 130,000

Low 79,187 69,000 n.a. 58,592 n.a. 138,200 130,000

Educational Groups

High 134,563 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 148,200 138,200

Medium 93,000 86,667 n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 130,000

Low 67,625 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 138,200 130,000

Health Care Groups

High 100,750 84,000 74,061 60,500 62,000 148,200 138,200

Medium 80,161 61,108 57,100 46,294 50,000 138,200 130,000

Low 65,000 50,086 47,028 39,000 43,805 138,200 130,000

Source: Congressional Budget Office using data provided by Abbott, Langer, and Associates, Inc. 

Notes: n.a. = not available.

Nonprofit foundations are not included in this comparison because data showing bonuses at those organizations are not available. Also, figures for salaries

alone (shown in Table A-1) sometimes exceed those for salaries and bonuses combined because the sample populations are not strictly comparable.

a. “High” indicates the salary at the 75th percentile, “average” is the median salary, and “low” is the salary at the 25th percentile.




This publication and others by CBO

are available at the agency's Web site:

www.cbo.gov