What it means
Administrative expenses cover the cost of management, finance, human resources, legal, general office costs and governance: everything needed to keep the organisation functioning that is not directly producing what it sells or delivers. In a charity these are separated from programme costs and fundraising costs, while in a company they usually sit within selling, general and administrative expenses.
The ratio matters because it is a quick signal of efficiency that outsiders can compute without inside knowledge. Donors, grant makers and regulators use it to compare organisations, and boards use it internally to check whether the support functions are growing faster than the activity they support.
Calculating it requires a consistent split between administrative and direct costs, and that split is where most of the argument happens. A finance manager who spends half her time on grant reporting might reasonably be allocated partly to programme costs, and small changes in those allocation rules can move the ratio by several percentage points.
Interpretation needs care because there is no universally correct level, and it varies enormously by sector and by size. A small organisation carries the same basic governance and audit obligations as a large one but spreads them over a much smaller expense base, so its ratio will naturally look worse.
The measure also invites a well known distortion. An organisation that starves its own finance systems, training and oversight will report a flattering ratio for a while and then discover that weak controls, high staff turnover and poor data cost far more than the overhead it avoided.
The sensible use is as a trend rather than a verdict. Watching your own ratio over several years, alongside the absolute dollar amount of administrative cost and the activity it supports, tells you far more than comparing a single year's percentage against a rival organisation whose cost classifications you cannot see.
In practice
Real-world examples.
Example
A grant maker requires applicants to report an administrative expense ratio below 20%. A community organisation at 23% reallocates part of its programme manager's salary from administration to direct delivery, and separately reduces office costs, bringing the reported figure to 18%.
Example
A trade association's board notices the ratio rising from 12% to 17% over three years while membership numbers are flat. The increase turns out to be driven by a new membership database and two extra finance staff, which the board accepts as a deliberate one-off investment rather than drift.
Example
A health insurer reports administrative costs at 11% of premiums and benchmarks the figure each quarter. When automation of claims handling cuts it to 9%, the saving is used to hold premiums flat for a year rather than to increase margin.
Think of it
“This ratio shows what percentage of spending goes to administration-your overhead efficiency.
Formula
Calculation
Administrative expense ratio = (administrative expenses / total expenses) x 100
A common variant uses total revenue as the denominator instead of total expenses.
A medium sized charity reports total expenses of $8,000,000 for the year. Of that, $6,200,000 went on programme delivery, $600,000 on fundraising and $1,200,000 on administration, covering the chief executive's office, finance, human resources, audit and general office costs.
Administrative expense ratio = ($1,200,000 / $8,000,000) x 100 = 15%.
If the same charity had total income of $8,600,000, the revenue based version of the ratio would be ($1,200,000 / $8,600,000) x 100 = 14.0%. The two figures differ only because the charity spent less than it received that year, which is why any comparison between organisations must confirm which denominator is being used.Case study
Seen in the real world.
The following is an illustrative and entirely fictional example. Brackenmoor Trust, an invented education charity with annual expenditure of $5,000,000, was proud of an administrative expense ratio of 7%, well below the level most of its funders looked for. The chief executive quoted the figure in every funding application.
The trust achieved it partly by running with one part time finance officer, no internal audit and a grants system built on spreadsheets. When a major funder required a full audit of a $1,200,000 restricted grant, the trust could not evidence how $210,000 of it had been spent, and had to repay a portion and fund an external review costing $85,000.
In this fictional account the board approved an additional $140,000 a year of finance and compliance capacity, pushing the ratio to about 10%. Funding applications since have presented the ratio alongside a short note on the trust's control environment, and two funders have said the combination is more persuasive than the low percentage alone ever was.
Watch out
Common mistakes.
- Comparing ratios between organisations without checking whether the denominator is total expenses or total revenue, since the two can differ by several percentage points.
- Treating a low ratio as proof of good management, when it can equally reflect underinvestment in finance, systems and oversight.
- Reclassifying costs between administration and direct delivery to hit a funder's threshold, rather than changing what the organisation actually spends.
Questions
People also ask.
What counts as an administrative expense?
Typically governance, finance, human resources, legal, audit, insurance and general office costs, meaning everything that keeps the organisation running rather than delivering its output.
Is there a target ratio to aim for?
No single figure applies across sectors, and the more useful test is whether your own ratio is stable or improving while the organisation's activity holds up.
Why do small organisations tend to report higher ratios?
Because fixed obligations such as audit, insurance and governance cost roughly the same regardless of size and are spread over a much smaller total expense base.
From the founder's library
Take it further with the book.
Build your financial confidence beyond this definition. Shihan's full-length guide, Accounting Fundamentals, takes the same plain-English approach and turns it into a complete, practical playbook for non-finance managers, business owners and students - with chapter-end quiz answers and presentation slides included.
25% off with code MMHQ25, applied at checkout. Priced in USD - checkout may show the equivalent in your local currency.
View the book and save 25%