New Democracy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820957528
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2403426503
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,387
Expenses
$1,242,944
Assets
$1,674,095
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM MARSHALL (DIRECTOR): $1,085,908 total reported compensation
  • LINDSAY LEWIS (DIRECTOR): $297,600 total reported compensation
  • COLIN MORTIMER (DIRECTOR): $138,750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

New Democracy is a support network and home-base for pragmatic Democratic leaders – governors, mayors, state officials and Members of Congress – with the mission of expanding the party’s appeal across Middle America and making Democrats competitive everywhere.

What it reported doing in 2024

Center for new liberalism, a digital-first grassroots movement of young people, is a part of new democracy. With over 70 chapters across the world, the new liberals civically engage at the local, state, and federal levels by creating affinity groups, educating their communities on important issues, and hosting forums to engage local elected leaders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 42.5%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 69.4%; rating input score 69; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -215.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 122.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 54.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 59.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 42.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $528K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.