ForPEACE

Legal name: Forpeace Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271679208
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Riverton, UT, United States
Phone
8312974300
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$314,165
Expenses
$336,764
Assets
$73,306
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGRET ELLWANGER (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • MARGRET ELLWANGER (CEO)
  • HEATHER WILLOUGHBY (DIRECTOR)
  • BARBERA HARPER (DIRECTORTREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Hyper-local programs directly meeting the priorities of our grassroots partners. Our programs include Community Development, Children’s Programs, Frontline in Ukraine, Water Infrastructure, Medical, and Rehabilitation. Relief forPEACE works side-by-side with Ukrainians responding to multifaceted needs of frontline communities during war time. forPEACE is a flexible and fast-moving organization that specializes in hyper-localized programs directly meeting the expressed priorities of our grassroots recipient partners. We integrate into the communities we serve and by having an administrative staff that is separately funded we ensure donations go fully to our projects and partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

See sch o.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.8%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 23%; rating input score 23; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -7.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $333K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 23/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.