Alpha Project International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465447980
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Phone
8059661751
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$289
Assets
$3,477
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOBIAS C BATESON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • TOBIAS C BATESON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
  • TAMARA A BATESON (SECRETARY & DIRECTOR)
  • THOMAS W SCHOEMAKER (TREASURER & DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To create multiple self-sustaining safe havens where at-risk youths will receive both educational and vocational training in order for them to grow into productive members of their societies. This will be accomplished by connecting like-minded philanthropic individuals with at-risk children in an international setting, allowing for the establishment of long-term, positive relations between the children and volunteers, leading to the enriched lives of all. The foundation's vision is a world where all children, regardless of socioeconomic circumstance, have the opportunity to thrive and become productive members of their societies.

What it reported doing in 2016

Supports a soccer club for youths located in nuevo arenal, costa rica by purchasing uniforms and equipment.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.03; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -95.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -146.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -91.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.