Giving of Life

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453980112
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
4233227484
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$158,837
Expenses
$189,853
Assets
$15,220
Liabilities
$1,967

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN MACLELLAN (PRESIDENT, DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUSSELL COURTNEY (SECRETARY, DIRECTOR): $56,772 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The soulcare project is dedicated to the discovery of true stories that lead to real people, and ultimately giving life in the community. We cast the widest possible net into the community offering resources, retreats, workshops and weekly meetings targeting influencers and culture shapers. We strategically place these at the doorstep of our target audience. This is accomplished by targeting two demographics; "under 30" inner city young adults and "over 30" caregivers and culture shapers.

What it reported doing in 2018

The soulcare project provides intentional space for rest and communion with christ. The organization's desire is to give leaders a safe place to experience the quiet assurance of god's love without becoming over-worked, exhausted and burnt out, by providing retreats or workshops where influencers and culture shapers have an opportunity to set aside their busy and productive lives in order to listen and hear god's voice through stillness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 49
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $246.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $162K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $57K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2015 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.