Friend of the Poor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205433026
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Norcross, GA, USA
Phone
6784052295
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$407,769
Expenses
$271,040
Assets
$842,430
Liabilities
$430

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Jeffrey Friedel (Trustee)
  • Mike McShane (Chairman)
  • Doug Mumma (Treasurer)

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

World ministries thru evangelism, church planting, equipping and training believers to be followers of Christ in word and deed ministries

What it reported doing in 2024

Clean Water Project: This project is aimed to provide assistance to those communities that are in need of potable water. Assistance is given in drilling water wells / bore wells, overhead water tanks, water supply with pipelines, water filters, and water harvesting as per the need.Educational Assistance: This project aims to provide educational support to those who need support to pursue education. It covers providing support for the daycare of children of those parents who are unable to take care of their children, school sponsorships, hostel, college, and tuition sponsorships as per the needs. Medical needs Support: To assist in providing help for individuals and communities' medical and hygiene needs. Community Development: to help needy communities in training for employable skills, reading and writing, income generation projects, women empowerment, etc. Relief and Rehabilitation: To support individuals and communities in distress due to man-made or natural calamities by giving relief as per their needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.4%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $37.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 33.5%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.11; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.4% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $243K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.