Democracy Planning & Enhancement Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 992273315
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2025520221
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,588,000
- Expenses
- $3,395,147
- Assets
- $2,459,899
- Liabilities
- $267,046
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SARAH R KNIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SARAH R KNIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $290,285 total reported compensation
- CHARLIE POSNER (HEAD OF RESEARCH): $194,719 total reported compensation
- MELISA CHAYEGAN (COO): $120,848 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 democracy planning & enhancement fund works to strengthen democratic practice and uphold the constitution.
What it reported doing in 2024
The democracy planning and enhancement fund is focused on developing strategy to promote checks and balances, distributed government power, transparency, and accountability, all for the purpose of ensuring that protections around civil rights, the separation of powers, and democratic norms embedded in the american constitutional structure are enhanced. It supports research, policy development, and networking to align federal, state, and local governments, and civic society organizations around interventions, actions, and dialogue to support this goal.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $80.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $290K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $611K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.