Fairy Godmother Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454299835
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Phone
5402572451
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Gift Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$521,192
Expenses
$545,512
Assets
$643,944
Liabilities
$88

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHLEEN PASSOLANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHLEEN PASSOLANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $84,073 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE MAURER (DIRECTOR): $35,210 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the fairy godmother project is to ease the burden of day to day life for families facing all phases of a pediatric cancer diagnosis.

What it reported doing in 2025

Family services and financial relief program- this comprehensiveprogram provides both emotional and practical support to familiesfacing pediatric cancer. Financial relief includes bill paymentassistance offered twice per year, with a maximum amount of $1,000 perfamily. All payments are made directly to service providers with a totalof $23,045 in direct financial relief provided in 2025. Additional supportincludes monthly meals prepared by volunteers, professional house cleaning, lawn care and the distribution of groceryand gas cards to support families during this difficult time. In 2025, fairy godmother project was honored to serve 48 families through thisprogram.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 26th 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: -4.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $377K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.