One Fair Wage Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

Policy shift: worker organizing - in 2024, our organizing department continued the '25 by 250' campaign, organizing restaurant, service and other low-wage workers to advance policy to raise wages and end the subminimum wages in 25 states by the united states' 250th anniversary. This year we won our first statewide victory in Michigan when the supreme court ruled in favor of wage increase policy. In addition to our work in mi, in 2024 we worked extensively in il, md, ma, az, and oh, and also conducted one fair wage organizing activities in multiple other states including ny, ct, co, ri, pr, hi, ca, id and ms.our organizing work is led by our national team working in partnership with local organizers we hired in many of these states in 2024. Organizing work included conducting surveys and outreach to restaurant workers, organizing media events, educating voters and elected officials, and sharing worker stories through printed materials, media, and events. Ofw national office organizes these efforts in states across the country, deploying our resources and people to take advantage of opportunities and mitigate challenges as they arise. Costs related to these activities included staffing, contractors, travel and lodging, office rent and expenses, printing and materials, and other expenses. Voter engagement : we engaged low-wage workers in voter education activities, pioneering new, scaled-up models of peer-to-peer voter engagement and get out the vote activities. Worker leadership development: our state steering committees and the national leadership network (nln) are core to our work to develop worker leaders. The nln meets monthly online and at least annually in person to plan and strategize campaigns to raise wages and eliminate subminimum wages both in their states and nationwide, sharing best practices in worker organizing.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 85
• Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
• Fundraising efficiency: $16.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
  • Compensation committee: Missing
  • Independent consultant: Pass
  • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
  • Written employment contract: Missing
  • Compensation survey or study: Missing
  • Board or committee approval: Pass
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 67.1%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
• 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Fail
  • 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: -5.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -20.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings