Global Soap Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270621849
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Norcross, GA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Voluntary Health Associations & Medical Disciplines N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$736,470
Expenses
$705,659
Assets
$236,999
Liabilities
$5,408

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Reduce waste and provide soap to vulnerable populations

What it reported doing in 2012

Collected soap from over 1,000 hotels, recycled the soap, and distributed new bars to vulnerable populations in benin, ghana, honduras, guatamala, el salvador, haiti, kenya, dominican republic, malawi, nigeria, sierra leone, and the united states through global health charities and distribution partners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 76.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 40.1% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $589K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.