The Policy Academies Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813333541
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029489163
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$373,724
Expenses
$1,739,811
Assets
$1,524,901
Liabilities
$225,846

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lynette Rawlings (Founder, President and CEO)
  • Alexandr L Maza (Vice President)
  • Marlene Castro (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lynette Rawlings (Founder, President and CEO): $441,650 total reported compensation
  • Alexandr L Maza (Vice President): $188,497 total reported compensation
  • Marlene Castro (Vice President): $176,340 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2024

Equity in Institutional and Research Practice: This initiative supports efforts to improve practices within the policy research and broader policy fields by encouraging broader representation of scholars and on research topics and methodologies. The program works with partners to enhance institutional practices in the development and application of public policy research. Through collaboration between scholars, institutions, and communities this initiative ensures that research informs policy decisions that reflect a wide range of perspectives and societal needs. This program also creates platforms for this work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.5%; rating input score 98; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -365.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 46.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $442K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.