The Pennsylvania Innocence Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 263176893
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2152044255
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Inmate Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,796,830
- Expenses
- $1,489,027
- Assets
- $1,952,069
- Liabilities
- $80,057
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DORIS DELTOSTO BROGAN (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- NILAM SANGHVI (LEGAL DIRECT): $134,465 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH A DELOSA (DEPUTY LEGAL): $108,414 total reported compensation
- ZANE MEMEGER (EXEC DIR/VIC): $95,171 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Pennsylvania innocence project works to exonerate those convicted of crimes they did not commit, to prevent innocent people from being convicted and to help the wrongfully convicted in their transition to freedom.
What it reported doing in 2025
Paip executes the mission in several ways: (1) conducting thorough legal and factual review of claims of innocence raised by incarcerated individuals, and where such review reveals credible claims of actual innocence, partners with pro bono outside counsel to provide legal representation seeking exoneration; (2) engaging in advocacy, and, when appropriate, working with the law enforcement community to address systemic causes of wrongful convictions, increase access to justice, and prevent wrongful convictions; (3) providing clinical training and experience to students in the fields of law, journalism, criminal justice, and forensic science to educate a new generation of advocates for the innocent; and 4) providing support to exonerees who, often after many years in prison, return to their communities. Paip receives participation by law students and faculty from accredited law schools in greater philadelphia and throughout Pennsylvania, as well as students and faculty in various other disciplines, including journalism, criminal justice and forensic science whose academic focus is directly relevant to advancing paip's mission.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 17.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 27.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 29 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.