Clear Path International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030468552
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
7544448886
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Health Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,311,672
Expenses
$3,395,036
Assets
$1,394,845
Liabilities
$110,602

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMAN A LUCAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMAN A LUCAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & SECRETARY): $182,247 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS FIDLER (AFGHAN COUNTRY DIRECTOR): $175,524 total reported compensation
  • GEHN FUJII (AFGHAN OPS MANAGER): $139,133 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Clear path international provides help, hope, and opportunity to those disabled or displaced by armed conflict.

What it reported doing in 2013

Clear path international has delivered international humanitarian assistance to individuals affected by conflict in afghanistan, myanmar, cambodia, laos, thailand and vietnam since its inception in 2000. Specializing in victim assistance for communities affected by explosive remnants of war, our program consists of: social and economic reintegration, physical rehabilitation, physical accessibility, awareness raising and emergency and outgoing medical care. In addition, clear path international coordinates with local and national governments and local organizations to provide needs assessments, assist in the development of stabilization plans and build the capacity of such entities to provide sustainable programming to conflict affected communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 11 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.