Laudato Si Challenge Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 825244693
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023
- Location
- Fairfax, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4148273073
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Roman Catholic
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,425,000
- Expenses
- $1,408,082
- Assets
- $1,350,675
- Liabilities
- $-18,997
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ERIC HARR (CO-FOUNDER & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ERIC HARR (CO-FOUNDER & CEO): $263,013 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Taking up the challenges of laudato si, the laudato si challenge seeks to sustainably improve the lives of 10 million people excluded from our common home by 2020 through businesses that are sustainable and ethical - thus anticipating the vision of the sustainable develpment.
What it reported doing in 2023
Working with public, private and faith sector leaders - speciifically at the vatican - to address the humanitarian crisis of forced displacement.inspired by pope francis and his encyclical letter, laudato si: on care for our common home, the laudato si challenge supports measurablee and time-bound solutions to the global challenges of climate change and poverty.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 63% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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
MIXED - Program spending has grown recently. 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: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 47
- Accountability: 52
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.4%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 54.1%; rating input score 54
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 17th 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: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 28.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 42.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 53.4% of revenue deployed · 54.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $761K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $263K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2023
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.