Abraham Path Initiative

Legal name: Abraham Path Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208041715
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Newtown, PA, United States of America
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$745,428
Expenses
$389,631
Assets
$531,393
Liabilities
$10,724

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER MCLAURIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DEIDRE COMBS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER MCLAURIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to grow and foster trails along the Abraham Path, empower local communities economically and socially, and create a place to remember our common ancestry, connect the human family, and build a bridge to the future. Membership Program > **We’re excited to announce the launch of the Abraham Path Initiative (API) Membership Program! As API continues to grow and make a lasting impact in the community, we want to extend that same commitment to you. By joining our exclusive Membership Program, you’ll be helping to further our mission and strengthening the work we do together. Your membership is a powerful way for us to thank you for your ongoing support and dedication. With your help, we can continue to make an even greater impact in the year ahead.

What it reported doing in 2024

The entity creates personal and cultural connections between people of southwest asia aka the middle east and the wider world by catalyzing sustainable economic development in the region through experiential tourism. Api has seeded more than 2,000 miles of walking trails.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.5%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 47.6%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.7%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 25.5% of revenue deployed · 47.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $185K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.