Policy Studies Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237163011
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2173558979
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,283,226
Expenses
$1,412,339
Assets
$318,394
Liabilities
$1,103,274

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR PAUL RICH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL GUTIERREZ-SANDOVAL (EXEC DIR/SEC): $120,000 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 disseminate scholarship widely at low cost, and along with scholarships and grants, it distributes its publications free of charge to over 4000 institutions in developing countries. See schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2024

These programs are part of the overall pso support of policy curriculum and scholarship. They are meant to sustain teaching by producing multi-media and multidisciplinary content. The goal of pso is to disseminate scholarship and promote interdisciplinary discussion of current issues. Pso takes no ideological stance, and its boards, committees, and staff are international, as well as its overall scope. All pso journals are furnished to several thousand universities in developing countries at no charge. All of pso's digital assets are backed up, including the video library with about 660 video recordings of lectures and sessions held during our various conferences. Pso has donated various sculpture artworks in the dupont circle neighborhood in Washington dc in cooperation with the cavanaugh foundation: https://democraticwoman.org/cavanaugh-sculpture-garden and more are planned in the coming years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.4%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 19th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.1%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.47; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.4% of revenue deployed · 50.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $711K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.