Organizing for Action

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461827418
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
3128936437
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$214,635
Expenses
$2,398,738
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Katherine Hogan (President/Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Katherine Hogan (President/Executive Director): $308,086 total reported compensation
  • Aaron Buchner (Chief of Staff): $199,355 total reported compensation
  • Traci Wile (Director of Community Engageme): $118,757 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Organizing for action (ofa) is a non-partisan, issue advocacy organization committed to growing the grassroots movement by training, educating, and activating civically engaged community members across the country. As a grassroots driven organization, ofa is dedicated to empowering action takers with the skills and tools needed to tip the scales of power back to the american people and away from the special interests in Washington, d.c. In carrying out its work, ofa will operate as a "social welfare" organization within the meaning of section 501(c)(4) of the internal revenue code.

What it reported doing in 2019

Issue Advocacy: OFA brings grassroots and digital scale to the larger progressive movement and leverages these online and "offline" networks to educate supporters, volunteers, and followers about national, state and local policy issues. OFA also works to maintain a public dialogue on these issues to help educate the general public about policies that impact them. OFA maintains an extensive grassroots organizing network that empowers volunteers to advocate for legislative and executive action, and other initiatives at the local, state and national levels. We focus on a progressive agenda centered around the issues that matter most to our supporters. OFA also uses its digital platforms to advocate for legislative action and other initiatives on the local, state and national levels, and executive action on the state and local level, and other initiatives on a variety of issues. OFA supporters call on elected officials to implement policy and move forward policy debates to address solutions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 51.1%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,017.6%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -33% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 51.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $338K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.