Disability Rights Arkansas Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710536689
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Little Rock, AR, USA
Phone
5012961775
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disabled Persons' Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,383,670
Expenses
$2,322,940
Assets
$1,577,237
Liabilities
$1,252,636

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAYSHA CLARK (PRESIDENT)
  • EARL JASPER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TOM MASSEAU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TOM MASSEAU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $159,366 total reported compensation
  • MARY FORST (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $123,146 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 vigorously advocate for and enforce the legal rights of people with disabilities in Arkansas.

What it reported doing in 2024

Protection and advocacy for developmental disabilities (padd) program serves individuals with developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities, autism spectrum disorder, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and neurological impairments. A developmental disability is a mental or physical impairment beginning before the age of 22 which is likely to continue indefinitely, limits certain major life activities, and reflects a need for special care, treatment, and/or individualized planning. Cases/projects within padd include - special education, monitoring, abuse/neglect/exploitation, guardianship, and medicaid appeals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $964.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.