Red Dirt Relief Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454392496
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9184074599
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$419,543
Expenses
$370,693
Assets
$398,727
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Katherine Dale (Executive Director)
  • Drew Winn (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Katherine Dale (Executive Director): $68,925 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide a safety net of critical assistance for Oklahoma music people in times of need.

What it reported doing in 2025

Emergency financial assistance fund: rdrf provides monetary grants to Oklahoma music industry professionals who have experienced financial hardship due to loss of work after accidents, illness, long-term healthcare treatment, loss of property due to natural disasters, and other unavoidable emergencies. These grants provide for living expenses such as housing, transportation and medical costs. Music festivals: rdrf hosts two annual music festivals featuring all-Oklahoma lineups with a goal of raising funds, building awarenesses and community. Music creator health care access: recognizing that many music industry workers are gig employees without access to employer-provided benefits, rdrf helps with medical expenses for those in need.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% 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 voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $302K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • 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: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.