Deliver the American Dream

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933561638
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,987,500
Expenses
$1,766,320
Assets
$269,074
Liabilities
$34,721

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eliza Leighton (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Eliza Leighton (Executive Director): $47,542 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ensure that all Americans have access to the American Dream, no matter who they are or where they come from.

What it reported doing in 2024

In our fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, Deliver the American Dream advanced opportunity, equity, and access to the American Dream through state-based policy education, legislative support, civic engagement, and public issue advocacy. DAD tracked DEI-related policy in all 50 states, issued weekly updates, maintained an online policy tracker, and prepared a year-end legislative report. The organization supported work on 30 bills in 13 states, distributed model legislation and a model resolution, assisted with testimony, letters, hearing preparation, speeches, and public messaging, conducted trainings and presentations in 10 states, hosted or supported town halls, field hearings, and listening sessions, and conducted public education campaigns generating approximately 2,300 constituent contacts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $401.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 106.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 121.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -140% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $48K · 3 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $428K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.