Drug Policy Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521516692
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126138040
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alcohol, Drug and Substance Abuse, Dependency Prevention and Treatment

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,950,037
Expenses
$12,005,399
Assets
$18,212,624
Liabilities
$2,225,093

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEREK OSCAR HODEL (PRESIDENT)
  • KASSANDRA FREDERIQUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KASSANDRA FREDERIQUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $323,198 total reported compensation
  • PAUL DANA (MANAGING DIRECTOR, DEV. & POL. STRATEGY): $285,784 total reported compensation
  • LINDSAY LASALLE (MANAGING DIRECTOR, POLICY): $261,780 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dpa improves people's lives by expanding health and addiction services while reducing arrests and incarceration.

What it reported doing in 2024

Treating drug use as a health issuecriminalization is the foundation of the drug war, with vast investments in punishment and scant support for services. As a result, drug possession is one of the most arrested offenses in the united states while overdose is the leading cause of accidental death. Dpa seeks to expand access to health and harm reduction services, and to reduce criminal penalties for drugs. Recent accomplishments include: - securing the launch or expansion of lifesaving harm reduction programs, including fentanyl detecting tools and sterile syringe services- supporting state and local policies to expand overdose prevention programs- defending and expanding funding for addiction services- providing strategic support and technical assistance to partner organizations in multiple states

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -0.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $323K · 20 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.