Purpose. Dignity. Action. (PDA)
Legal name: Purpose Dignity Action
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 910852323
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2063920050
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Legal Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $37,031,862
- Expenses
- $33,633,802
- Assets
- $22,296,573
- Liabilities
- $11,402,358
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDRA KRANZLER (PRESIDENT)
- AMANDA DUBOIS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- LISA DAUGAARD (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- TARA MOSS (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- FE LOPEZGAETKE (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LISA DAUGAARD (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $277,444 total reported compensation
- TARA MOSS (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $249,960 total reported compensation
- FE LOPEZGAETKE (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $242,293 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
PDA demonstrates that change can best be achieved through responsive care and inter-agency coordination. We provide training and technical support locally, nationally and internationally on the models we developed. Organizing We provide a home base and support for people directly affected by the systems we seek to change, to organize for transformation. We provide a home base and support for people directly affected by the systems we seek to change, to organize for transformation. Advocacy We lift up community safety models and secure policy and resources to scale them. We champion justice through legal and policy advocacy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Colead/justcare: adapted lead during the covid crisis to provide intensive case management teams for individuals who were living unsheltered after shelter closures and de-intensification, jail and court closures, closure of publicly accessible sanitation facilities, and closure of in-person behavioral health programs. Used hotels and other non-congregate facilities to provide private rooms for people needing significant support due to complex behavioral health needs. Assisted in developing exit plans, income stabilization, and permanent housing plans. Resolved encampments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 80% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $313.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.2%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $30.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 29 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13.8M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.