Friends of Chikwa Parish Nfp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862386698
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
6302943896
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$215,434
Expenses
$85,854
Assets
$209,136
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rev Gerald T Gunderson (Director, President & Secretary)
  • Sean Barry (Director, Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Rev Gerald T Gunderson (Director, President & Secretary)
  • Sean Barry (Director, Vice President)
  • Tom Festle (Director, 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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Friends of Chikwa Parish NFP (FOCP) was founded to further the charitable purpose of supporting the impoverished Chikwa Parish, part of the Catholic Diocese of Chipata, in Zambia, and its surrounding community. It seeks to identify projects to address infrastructure and support basic human needs. Its fundraising philosophy is based on the dignity of the human person and the preferential option for the poor -- two principles grounded in Catholic Social Teaching.

What it reported doing in 2025

FOCP made grants enabling completion and blessing of the new St Joseph rectory, a base for the priest and pastoral associates serving the region. FOCP helped provide furniture, household items, and food security resources; it helped complete a school's new teacher's residence FOCP continues to support food, education, and transportation needs of its pastoral agents; and it continues to sponsor secondary education for some promising students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.6%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.27 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 60.1%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 56.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.6% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $79K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.