Delta Research & Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521338072
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023471337
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,028,222
Expenses
$4,510,681
Assets
$12,369,513
Liabilities
$241,180

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RENEE HARPER (PRESIDENT)
  • TINA FERNANDEZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KARLA GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARLA GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $132,243 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The delta research and educational foundation (dref) identifies issues affecting black women, their families, and communities of the african diaspora globally, and creates solutions through research, programming, and funding in support of charitable and educational programs of delta sigma theta sorority, inc. And other collaborative organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth and risk reduction - the delta student enrichment program (dsep) is a 12-month afterschool and summer-bridge program established to provide data-informed, prevention-based activities and events that promote a positive outcome in several interrelated areas: (a) academic performance, (b) social-emotional development, (c) risk prevention related to crime, drugs, and sexual activity, (d) health and wellness, and (e) parental and community involvement. The program aims to serve primarily low-income families in the liberty road corridor of baltimore county by providing relevant innovative activities and services at no cost to participants. The program includes targeted activities (e.g. Subject area tutoring) and broad activities (book club, steam projects, gardening, recreation and sports) as well parent interactive workshops, virtually and in person. The program addresses social-emotional development, risk prevention, health, and wellness via age-appropriate lessons, small group discussions, and presentations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $56.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 71.5%; rating input score 71; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.74; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $132K · 27 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 45 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.