Reproductive Freedom For All Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521100361
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 202-973-3000
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,241,361
- Expenses
- $25,514,327
- Assets
- $47,272,769
- Liabilities
- $3,646,703
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RUKMINI TIMMARAJU (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
- YVONNE GUTIERREZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- LEAH CHANDLER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPMENT)
- REBECCA MARQUES (VICE PRESIDENT OF NATIONAL ORGANIZING)
- RYAN STITZLEIN (VICE PRESIDENT OF POLITICAL AND GR)
Highest reported compensation
- RUKMINI TIMMARAJU (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $433,824 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH SCHOETZ (CHIEF CAMPAIGNS AND ADVOCACY OFFICER): $320,643 total reported compensation
- LEAH CHANDLER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPMENT): $317,077 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to support, as a fundamental right and value, a person’s freedom to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices through education, training, organizing, legal action, and public policy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy and organizing: with 4 million members in all 50 states and chapters in Arizona, California, Georgia, Michigan, and Nevada, we work each day in support of reproductive freedom-working in community with our allies and partners to restore, protect, and expand access to abortion care, birth control, paid parental leave, and protections from pregnancy discrimination. We are a national leader, organizing people year-round at the state and federal levels to drive awareness and foster sustained activism and community engagement. Rooted in our values, we leverage our organizing infrastructure (national, state, digital) to educate our members and equip them with the tools and training they need to lead in their own communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.4%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 87.4%; rating input score 87; 19th 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: -5.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.85; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 80.4% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $19.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $434K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.6M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 12 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.