North Carolina For The People

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921920363
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9192725447
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$481,336
Expenses
$272,866
Assets
$290,661
Liabilities
$82,191

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Price Kromm (Executive Director and Board Chair)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Price Kromm (Executive Director and Board Chair): $104,960 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 educate the public on how to build a democracy where everyone participates, every vote is counted, voting rights are fully enforced, and everyone's voice is heard; to work toward a system where everyone has a say in decisions that affect our lives, and to be fairly represented by elected officials who are responsive to our needs in order to make our lives better.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, the organization worked to enhance democracy and strengthen civic participation at a time of significant challenge. The organization launched 'Why Judges Matter NC' to highlight the important role courts play in shaping policies that affect everyday life, helping increase awareness and participation in judicial elections. 'Why Judges Matter NC' was a website that was the product/effort of several 501(c)(3) civic education related organizations. The organization also engaged in election administration education to educate citizens about how elections are administered. So this was the nuts and bolts of how to register, how to vote, by absentee ballot, the locations and times of voting venues, both for early voting and the day of the election.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.1%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $320.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.1% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.