The Fairness Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464482738
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
8442931001
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Interest Law

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,516,101
Expenses
$4,109,456
Assets
$5,384,310
Liabilities
$1,139,451

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATHAN J MCGRATH (PRESIDENT & GENERAL COUNSEL)
  • DANIELLE R ACKER SUSANJ (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW L GARBER ENDED 131 (VICE PRESIDENT & CORPORATE COUNSEL)
  • JOHN BOUDER (VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • NATHAN J MCGRATH (PRESIDENT & GENERAL COUNSEL): $506,622 total reported compensation
  • DANIELLE R ACKER SUSANJ (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $248,008 total reported compensation
  • ANTHONY R HOLTZMAN (MANAGING ATTORNEY): $242,660 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The fairness center, inc. Is authorized to conduct litigation as a (a) legal services organization; (b) human and civil rights defense organization; (c) public interest law firm; and (d) organization attempting to achieve charitable goals through institution of litigation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Legal services; the fairness center, inc. Provides legal services to those hurt by public sector union officials. See schedule o for a description of cases litigated and the rationale for the determination that the litigation benefits the public generally.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.6%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.6% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $507K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.