Common Threads Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814212971
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6466470935
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,124,654
Expenses
$623,008
Assets
$913,275
Liabilities
$14,919

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VESNA GOLIC (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ANN BLUME (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • MARY LUKE (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • MARY B MATHERON (CO-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • VESNA GOLIC (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $84,000 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL COHEN (CLINICAL DIRECTOR): $81,231 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 believe that all survivors of sexual and other forms of violence are entitled to high quality psychological care. Our mission is to ensure that everyone who survives trauma, regardless of circumstance, has access to that care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Common threads project develops effective methodology and programs for recovery from the psycho-social consequences of sexual violence, war, and discplacement. Ctp trains and supervises local mental health practitioners in diverse contexts so that they can provide group-trauma-informed therapy based on the common threads model of treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 41
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.8%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 64.6%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.6%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.47; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 32.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.8% of revenue deployed · 64.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $402K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.