Pro-Choice Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237440830
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2066241990
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$479,560
Expenses
$415,065
Assets
$194,805
Liabilities
$112,230

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Samantha Alloy (Executive Director)
  • Margo Franz (President)
  • Melissa Johnsen (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Samantha Alloy (Executive Director): $125,049 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 protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy Pro-Choice Washington conducts lobbying trainings for our activists to help them impact the decisions of their legislators and elected officials. With these tools, activists might take direct action - emailing, calling, or 11 meetings with lawmakers - or use personal platforms to bring awareness to an issue. During the Washington State Legislative Session, Pro-Choice Washington mobilizes trained activists to lobby their lawmakers on behalf of the Pro-Choice Washington legislative agenda to advance reproductive freedom, health equity, and community wellbeing across the State.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.8%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 35.5%; rating input score 36
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th 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: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 13.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.8% of revenue deployed · 35.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.