< Back to the Resource Gallery
Authored by Aprio
Summary: Cybercriminals are targeting nonprofits more often, putting sensitive data, financial resources, and even their core missions at risk. Some recent high-profile breaches have exposed millions of records and caused serious losses for organizations. Why are nonprofits commonly seen as “mission-rich but cyber-poor”? What can you do to better protect your organization?
Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) are essential to society, supporting communities, advancing causes, and providing critical services. Unfortunately, NPOs are increasingly targeted for cybercrime. Many cybercriminals often view nonprofits as “mission-rich but cyber-poor,” since they hold valuable data and access to substantial funds, but often lack the resources necessary to protect themselves from even the most common and basic hacking methods.
Protecting your nonprofit’s mission and stakeholders is essential. In this article, we explain why hackers target nonprofits, provide real-world breach examples and lessons learned, outline standard attack techniques, and offer a practical, risk-based approach to cybersecurity.
Three factors underly almost most hacks against NPOs:
In the case of NPOs, this relates primarily to data that can be sold and/or extorted. Personally Identifiable Information of donors, electronic Protected Health Information of patients, and access credentials for NPO employees can all be readily sold on the black market. Many NPOs, especially those with time sensitive and critical missions such as healthcare, are common targets for ransomware. Another reason that NPOs are appealing to hackers is that many have access to funds that can be compromised by way of social engineering or account takeover where they gain access to users’ credentials and transfer the funds themselves.
A common perception is that the NP sector generally does not have security safeguards adequate to protect their sensitive data, funds, and critical systems. Even if you assume for the moment, that this is not true, we know that the growth of the cybercrime ecosystem continues to make hacking easier and more accessible. Here are two examples of the commoditization of hacking toolsets and know-how:
While some hackers are identified and prosecuted, this is very rare because cybercriminals usually operate outside of legal jurisdiction and other challenges related to attribution and prosecution. NPOs should assume there is virtually nothing deterring the hacking community from targeting their organization.
Most breaches of NPOs (and the business sector at large) are not publicly disclosed. We do know the overall average for U.S. businesses is approximately 10% for publicly disclosed hacks, and we know that most hacks are not reported. Based on very meaningful anecdotal feedback from cross-section of NPOs, we are confident that at least 20-30% have experienced some form of breach in the recent 2-3 years.
The following examples of disclosed breaches to U.S. based NPOs just since 2024 illustrates the scope and nature of breaches:
Like in other industries, there are two primary and interrelated hacking methods deployed against NPOs:
In 2026, AI will supercharge the social engineering threat, by dramatically increasing the believability and volume of attacks.
We know that for all sectors, including NP, the sophistication and volume of breaches are increasing. Here are two primary reasons why:
There is no one-size-fits-all approach for NPOs. There are, however, four fundamentals that can be applied to right-size NPOs’ cybersecurity programs.
Although it is commonly overlooked and misunderstood, governance is the foundation to an effective cyber risk management program. In turn, the foundation of governance is the NPO’s risk management objectives. Too many organizations don’t establish meaningful risk management objectives until after they have been breached. Understanding this psychological hurdle, our recommendation is for NPO leaders to not just follow recommendations from this article but to also speak with a cross-section of other business and NPO leaders to understand their perspectives.
We think there is a good chance you will find one or more that will share their post-breach lessons learned, and if so, that will help bridge the gap between risk management being theoretical to practical and critical to protect the mission. Your cyber insurance broker may also be able to share recent and anonymized examples.
Gaining clarity of your cyber risk management objectives provides direction you need to round out your governance approach. Other governance topics include:
Irrespective of your NPO’s mission, data, and services, there are fundamental cybersecurity measures (aka, cyber hygiene) that every NPO should deploy. These include:
Many NPOs rely on MSPs to provide their IT environment and much or all their security. Unfortunately, many do not understand whether the MSP is (a) effectively secured so their systems can’t be compromised to provide a vector to the NPO’s environment, and (b) providing effective security for the NPO. This is a subject beyond scope of this document but involves gaining clarity for these topics before engaging an MSP and then having visibility on an ongoing basis after the MSP is engaged.
There are several security standards and frameworks that can serve as resource in building out your cyber security fundamentals. These include CIS 18, ISO 27001, NIST 800-171, NIST CSF, and AICPA SOC for CyberSecurity and/or SOC 2).
The hygiene type controls outlined earlier are minimum controls every NPO should have. They are not necessarily what’s needed to effectively secure the NPO. This step would identify what controls, if any, are necessary to extend beyond the cyber hygiene fundamentals.
Earlier in this document, we outlined reasons why NPOs are targets and methods used by hackers. Every NPO should try to imagine their org from the perspective of a hacker. This means, knowing what about the NPO represents motivation, and what methods might be used. Answering these questions provides a risk-based roadmap as to what controls would be needed to prevent, detect, and respond to those threats.
A more nuanced approach to understanding risk is to quantify in financial terms the risks represented to the organization (i.e., cyber risk quantification or CRQ). CRQ provides the defensible rationale needed for purposes related to prioritization, investment decisions and rationalizing cyber insurance coverage.
Monitoring is a key dimension of security governance discussed above. Monitoring is critical to offset drift and atrophy, and it reminds your employees and stakeholders that the controls they are responsible for really matter.
Monitoring can take the form of self-assessment or independent reviews by third-parties. Depth can vary to include just inquiry or inspection of evidence such as system settings and control procedures.
The scale and continued expansion of the cybercrime ecosystem and its commoditization means that virtually no NPO is too small to be a target (just like we know all our households are targets).
As described in this article, real cybersecurity risk management extends beyond compliance and includes a governance dimension to help assure your organization cost-effectively adapts amid evolving threats. Understanding your risks, recognizing how attacks occur, and implementing practical safeguards will strengthen your organization and protect your mission.
You don’t need to face this constant pressure alone. Working with advisors who understand nonprofit challenges helps you navigate this complex environment with confidence.
Please connect with your advisor if you have any questions about this article.
Call us at (800) 624-2400 or fill out the form below and we’ll contact you to discuss your specific situation.
This article was written by Aprio and originally appeared on 2026-02-03. Reprinted with permission from Aprio LLP.
© 2026 Aprio LLP. All rights reserved. https://www.aprio.com/insights-events/how-can-nonprofits-manage-cybersecurity-risk-ins-article-np/
“Aprio” is the brand name under which Aprio, LLP, and Aprio Advisory Group, LLC (and its subsidiaries), provide professional services. LLP and Advisory (and its subsidiaries) practice as an alternative practice structure in accordance with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and applicable law, regulations, and professional standards. LLP is a licensed independent CPA firm that provides attest services, and Advisory and its subsidiaries provide tax and business consulting services. Advisory and its subsidiaries are not licensed CPA firms.
This publication does not, and is not intended to, provide audit, tax, accounting, financial, investment, or legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified professional advisor before taking any action based on the information herein.
A full-service accounting and financial consulting firm with locations in Bay City, Clare and West Branch, Michigan.
Opening its doors in 1944, Weinlander Fitzhugh is a full-service accounting and financial consulting firm with locations in Bay City, Clare and West Branch, Michigan. WF provides services such as, accounting, auditing, tax planning and preparation, payroll preparation, management consulting, retirement plan administration and financial planning to a variety of businesses and organizations.
For more information on how Weinlander Fitzhugh can assist you, please call (989) 893-5577.