The Ordinary People Society Tops

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820587071
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Dothan, AL, USA
Phone
3346712882
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,335,812
Expenses
$896,106
Assets
$500,599
Liabilities
$40,858

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RODRESHIA RUSSAW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RODRESHIA RUSSAW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,287 total reported compensation
  • TINA GLASGOW (CFO): $41,560 total reported compensation
  • IRIS GRAY (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT): $15,417 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The ordinary people society is an innovative, faith-based non-profit. To create, build and maintain a better humanity for all.

What it reported doing in 2023

Rapid and Community Response is to support those in crisis to include homelessness, homeowners with utility expenses and churches during the pandemic through supportive services and financial support while providing them with means of communication by the purchasing of phones and access to internet. Community and Rapid Response also provided supported for the purchase of medicine for the needy and assisted with funeral expenses during the pandemic for needy families. The program further extended assistance to all families that needed support for general household items, food and clothing during the pandemic. Special sub-programs were incorporated for the elderly and disabled individuals for individualized support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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

REVIEW - Program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 45
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.5%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 39.5%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 12th 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; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.5% of revenue deployed · 39.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $162K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.