National Priorities Project

Legal name: National Priorities Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043070112
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Northampton, MA, United States
Phone
413 584 9556
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$747,052
Expenses
$863,219
Assets
$150,956
Liabilities
$9,116

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Dennis Bidwell (Chair)
  • Heidi Garrett Peltier (Treasurer)
  • Jeff Rosen (Clerk)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

National Priorities Project (NPP) inspires individuals and movements to take action so our federal resources prioritize peace, shared prosperity, and economic security for all. In 2014, NPP was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of our pioneering work to track federal spending on the military and promote a U.S. federal budget that represents Americans' priorities, including funding for people's issues such as inequality, unemployment, education, health and the need to build a green economy. Vision for Change National Priorities Project is the only nonprofit, non-partisan federal budget research organization in the nation with the mission to make the federal budget accessible to the American public. We believe that everyone can and should understand and participate in critical debates about federal spending and revenue. Our team takes a complex federa.

What it reported doing in 2015

The organization expanded our work to uncover, illustrate, and reallocate public dollars toward domestic need like education, jobs and health care. We made it even easier for ordinary people to fight for federal revenue and spending policies that work for all Americans. We conducted high-quality research and rigorous analysis of the federal budget and made it publicly available in a way that is accessible to ordinary people.We released in-depth publications focused on taxes, the annual budet request, and issue areas such as the military, education, environment, health care and earned benefits. Our localized online tools tracked federal money flowing into and out of states, cities and congressional districts. We produced accessible infographics, videos, blogs and reports that make federal budget data relevant and accessible to average Americans. We increased the frequency of communication across diverse media platforms and partnerships with key constituencies by creating material whick motivates people to engage and take effective action. We built the capacity of constituents who are ready to engage in a broad and strategic movement to shift federal budget priorities. We conducted training and presentations to educate individuals and partners nationwide. Our educational curriculum now includes a Move the Money training program develop in partnership with Peace Action and a classroom toolkit fo our acclaimed book, A Peoples Guide to the Federal Budget. We gave webinars, created videos and spoke at conferences across the nation to help Americans understand and weigh in on decisions about how their tax dollars are spent. In 2013, our constituents ranged from 200 women state legislators gatered in Washington DC on the eve of the government shutdown, to 340 elder participants in a regional senior action training day, to 230 leaders from Community Action Agencies , to 75 student leaders from Roosevelt Campus Network to 23 youth participants in an afterschool program for girls in New York City.We leveraged data to bolster and inspire advocacy that focuses on moving money out of the Pentagon and into increasing investment in peoples issues as education, the environment, health care and earned benefits programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $692K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.