AZ Poder

Legal name: Poder

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830983906
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6025452180
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voter Education, Registration

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$316,893
Expenses
$759,504
Assets
$1,808,640
Liabilities
$97,166

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ben Laughlin (Executive Director)
  • Isabel Garcia (Executive Director)
  • Nichole Cassidy (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ben Laughlin (Executive Director): $110,000 total reported compensation
  • Isabel Garcia (Executive Director): $110,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

AZ PODER builds political power among working-class communities to disrupt and dismantle state violence through community governance, organizing our base to take action, and shifting mainstream culture away from punishment towards health and wellness.

What it reported doing in 2025

Poder engages Arizona voters through voter registration, voter guides, and information on how and where to vote. Poder provides community based political education on issues important to residents on the South and West sides of Phoenix. Voter Outreach involves canvassing, communications, digital advertising, graphics, literature pieces, voter registration tools, texting, calls, mailers, signs, and billboards.

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 15% for direct work, 48% for grants, and 38% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th 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; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -139.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.38; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $556K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $110K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.