Children of Haiti and Refugee Projects Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833057494
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Phone
5087908425
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$122,820
Expenses
$911,570
Assets
$3,724,428
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • FORREST BROMAN (CHAIRPERSON): $270,928 total reported compensation
  • DORON BROMAN (VICE CHAIRPERSON): $167,167 total reported compensation
  • NAIZA VAIDA (BOARD MEMBER): $42,666 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Children of haiti and refugee projects (cohrp)'s mission is to provide learning opportunities to children in haiti with limited or no access to formal education, through the collective support and leadership of international schools, international institutions, and individuals worldwide. Our goal is to nurture each child's intellectual, ethical, social and physical growth, that each may become a positive, contributing member of the haitian community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Collateral repair project (crp) is a grassroots effort to bring much-needed assistance to refugees and other victims of war and conflict-those commonly referred to as "collateral damage." we run an emergency-assistance program that provides food vouchers, fuel, mattresses, and other materials to refugees who do not receive aid or have their basic needs covered. We also manage a vibrant community center, where families can rebuild social ties and participate in activities such as english classes, support groups, computer training, and wellness sessions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 27.1%; rating input score 27
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -642.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.09; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -69.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 27.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $247K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $271K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 27/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.