Leaving the Jar

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371476325
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Centreville, VA, USA
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$378,190
Expenses
$294,239
Assets
$439,945
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MANAL MOUSSA (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • MANAL MOUSSA (Executive Director)
  • ISAAC AKLADEOS (DIRECTOR)

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

Leaving The Jar equips communities to prevent human trafficking, intervenes in the lives of vulnerable individuals, and walks alongside survivors as they rebuild their futures with dignity, hope, and lasting support. We are committed to caring for survivors holisticallypsycholog

What it reported doing in 2025

In the United States, Leaving The Jar provided human trafficking awareness and educational sessions across multiple communities, schools, universities, and churches. These programs focused on educating youth, parents, educators, students, faith leaders, and community members about the realities of human trafficking, warning signs, prevention strategies, online safety, and available resources for victims and survivors. Through community engagement and outreach, the organization worked to increase public awareness, promote early intervention, and empower individuals to recognize and respond to trafficking situations effectively.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.2%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.5; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: 36.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.8% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $257K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 19 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • 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.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.