Global Peace Train
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264821241
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Boulder, CO, USA
- Phone
- 7203451305
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $63,292
- Expenses
- $85,400
- Assets
- $7,066
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Aja Duniven (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Aja Duniven (Executive Director)
- Adam Kuhn (Board Treasurer)
- Dan Adams (Board Secretary)
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
Global Peace Train (GPT) delivers resources to underserved communities and tells their stories to help others understand diverse cultures. Our focus in 2024 is with the Lakota people of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota - a rural, low income population whose cultures and traditions are threatened by tribal elders' passing. Through the Ghost Dance project, GPT shares Lakota wisdom, values, and history through technologically innovative and immersive storytelling. Through Tribal Traditions, GPT fosters the livelihoods of Lakota artists by marketing unique, handmade star quilts that exemplify the link Lakota traditions of honoring ancestors and remembering ties to the earth.
What it reported doing in 2025
Ghost Dance is an interactive educational program designed for theaters, art venues, film festivals, schools, universities, and museums. The world is at risk of losing the connection to precious Indigenous wisdom as tribal elders leave us. We are building a digital library of such content before it is too late. The Ghost Dance project includes a SAG-AFTRA film (98% complete), a behind-the-scenes documentary about making the film (20% shot), and a multi part virtual reality (VR) experience (early production) that allows people to step inside the story and visit the Pine Ridge Reservation from a VR headset. Being a SAG production allowed us to select high quality actors from the Screen Actors Guild and hold the production to a professional standard overall. We gathered a professional team, made our way through thousands of auditions to secure a fantastic cast, and shot the film across Colorado, Nebraska, and South Dakota for 22 days during 2022-2024. The expedition involved a dedicated group of volunteers, crew, and cast members ranging from 16 to 40 individuals each day. In autumn 2023, we finalized a rough cut of the narrative film, which currently stands at a 60-minute runtime. We hosted 4 community previews of the initial edits of the film to gather feedback about the gaps in the story and how we can make the film stronger. Still to be completed are additional pickup shots and the anticipated large opening scene which will require several additional shoot days. The resulting feature-length production will delve deeper into the rich tapestry of the narrative, reaching a wider audience and making an even greater impact in preserving and promoting American Indian culture. The production provides professional filmmaking opportunities for over 50 locals from Pine Ridge Reservation and more than 20 volunteers from outside the reservation. This program fosters cross-cultural education by introducing the crew to Lakota culture and traditions, while offering the Lakota participants hands-on experience in professional filmmaking.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 4th 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: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -34.9%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $85K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 42 of 45 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and related organizations
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- 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.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.