1Million Project Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822640564
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Overland Park, KS, USA
Phone
8445735289
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,845,168
Expenses
$8,982,771
Assets
$8,054,178
Liabilities
$502,196

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Doug Michelman (President)
  • John Branam (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Doug Michelman (President): $1,595,210 total reported compensation
  • Vonya McCann (Director): $1,513,357 total reported compensation
  • Paul Schieber Jr (Treasurer): $1,063,060 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To help, over the course of multiple years, one million K-12 students who do not have reliable internet access at home reach their full educational potential by giving them mobile devices and free high-speed internet access.

What it reported doing in 2019

The 1Million Project - 70% of America's school teachers assign homework online, but more than five million families with school-aged children don't have home internet connectivity. We believe in the potential of all students to excel. Our goal is to enable one million K-12 students to dream bigger, explore further, and face fewer obstacles to opportunity with free mobile devices and high-speed wireless internet access. During the first three years of the 1Million Project, approximately 226,000 students in approximately 250 school districts within 35 states were equipped with free mobile devices and high-speed wireless internet access.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 33
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 16.7%; rating input score 17; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -53.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -103% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -36.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 45 of 46 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2018 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 79 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 81 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 17/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.