Government Accountability Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521343924
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024570034
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Government and Public Administration

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,425,035
Expenses
$3,458,567
Assets
$1,916,444
Liabilities
$387,475

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Louis Clark (Executive Director &CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Louis Clark (Executive Director &CEO): $182,437 total reported compensation
  • Karen Gray (General Counsel): $140,952 total reported compensation
  • James Harden (Chief Financial Officer): $130,344 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Government Accountability Project (GAP) is a 48-year-old non-profit public interest organization that promotes government and corporate accountability by advancing occupational free speech, defending whistleblowers, and empowering citizen activists. GAP is the worlds leading whistleblower protection organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

INTERNATIONAL In 2024 the first Spanish-language whistleblower website launched in Chile, where whistleblower rights are a novelty among the legal community. The website, Whistleblower Chile, gives people access to resources and creates awareness about whistleblowing, including Chilean case law, statutes, and profiles of whistleblowers from Chile and other Spanish-language countries. This project was created by our Senior International Fellow for Latin America, Jorge Martnez Rivera. In 2024, Government Accountability Project wrapped up its three-year project in Serbia with Pitaljka/Eutopia Association to help increase the capacity of future lawyers to practice anti-corruption and whistleblower law and provide legal services to whistleblowers through increasing University of Belgrade Law School students knowledge of whistleblower law and teaching them lawyering skills. The project was funded by the U.S. Department of State Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. In July 2024, Government Accountability Projects International Director and Senior International Fellow for Latin America attended Transparency Internationals Anti-Corruption Conference in Lithuania. Our International Director spoke on a panel on international whistleblower rights. In August 2024, Government Accountability Projects International Director and Legal Director traveled to Oslo, Norway to present their research on the implementation of the European Union whistleblower directive. International Whistleblowing Research Network organized the conference. In October 2024, Government Accountability Project received a subgrant from the Association for the Promotion of Good Governance and Performance SHIFT in Croatia to implement a projected funded by the U.S. Department of State. The name of the project is Supporting transparency of governance and strengthening whistleblower protections in Croatia. In May 2024, Government Accountability Projects International Director, Legal Director, and Senior International Fellow for Latin America participated in a a project to help the Directorate-General for Ethics and Government Integrity (DIGEIG) develop a draft law on the protection of whistleblowers. This project was supported by the Program for the Development of Commercial Law (CLDP) of the United States Department of Commerce, and USAID and included a workshop in the Dominican Republic in November 2024, where we presented international best practices for whistleblower legislation. The Government Accountability Project continued to provide global leadership with Legal Director Tom Devine continuing to serve on the Board of Whistleblowing International Network (WIN) and International Director Samantha Feinstein continuing as Vice Chair of the Board on the United Nation Convention Against Corruption committee. GAP helped WIN prepare a policy rebuttal and engage in public advocacy leading to withdrawal of an anti-whistleblower law in Slovakia that would have violated the 2019 EU Whistleblower Directive for which GAP was on the front lines of development. We sourced nonpublic datasets from several different corporate secrecy havens in the Americas that will provide the basis for collaborative investigative projects. Co-hosted by the US Embassy in Mexico and other organizations, our international program director traveled to Mexico City in April 2024 for the 4th roundtable meeting on Combatting Corruption through Whistleblowers in Mexico. With the objective of developing a potential law through training and mentorship, GAP presented the 20 best whistleblower practices and a general overview of international whistleblowing practices. Our work also included a workshop to develop principles for a future whistleblower law in Mexico. When a delegation from Mexico came to DC on a whistleblower study tour, we provided an overview of whistleblower laws and frameworks and discussed the role of the relationship between civil society and the government. In May 2024

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.9% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $287K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 34 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.