Alliance for Healthy Marijuana Poli

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813697691
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
9732710728
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,029,146
Expenses
$361,512
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANNMARIE SHAFER (DIRECTOR)
  • KEVIN SABET-SHARGHI (OFFICER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the alliance for healthy marijuana policies, inc. Is exclusively for the promotion of social welfare within the meaning of section 501(c)(4) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended, or the corresponding provision of any future federal tax code.

What it reported doing in 2016

Alliance for healthy marijuana policies, inc. Worked to improve the health and welfare of indviduals and communities by, among other things, supporting policies, activities and programs through education and advocacy for the adoption or rejection of legislation on issues related to public health, safety, prevention and treatment of legal and illegal drug use.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.1%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 98.8%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 82.2%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.1% of revenue deployed · 98.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $357K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.