City of Joy International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842192966
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Glendale, AZ, USA
Phone
4805240461
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$410,247
Expenses
$417,303
Assets
$81,026
Liabilities
$605

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON COUGHLIN (PRESIDENT)
  • BERT EMERSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JON COUGHLIN (PRESIDENT): $54,789 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We promote education, health, and welfare of children and adults in rwanda through grants to the christian school and church, humanitarian aid to the community, and missionary work.

What it reported doing in 2024

In recognition of the critical connection between health and learning, city of joy funded the provision of 190,000 meals for students living in extreme poverty, ensuring they had the nutrition necessary to thrive in school. We also provided community health insurance to 1,920 individuals, safeguarding students and their families from medical crises and enabling better long-term well-being. Vocational and technological training vocational training continued to provide economic opportunity for families. In 2024, 30 students graduated from joys sewing program, while six secondary school students received hands-on training in computer networking, laying the groundwork for careers in tech. These programs give students practical skills that open new income streams and raise the standard of living across the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.7% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $364K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.