Murphslife Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853332093
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Garden City, ID, USA
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,716,023
Expenses
$2,268,545
Assets
$3,258,537
Liabilities
$160,476

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AARON MURPHY (PRESIDENT/SE)

Highest reported compensation

  • AARON MURPHY (PRESIDENT/SE): $84,500 total reported compensation
  • ASHLEY SMITH (DIRECTOR): $45,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Murphslife travels the world, primarily in latin america, highlighting families and communities suffering financially. We use donations to build homes, small businesses and schools. We feed the hungry and refugees and provide medical care. Many of the activities are highlighted on social media.

What it reported doing in 2024

Murphslife travels the world, primarily in latin america, highlighting families and communities suffering financially. We use donations to build homes, small businesses and schools. We feed the hungry and refugees and provide medical care. Many of the activities are highlighted on social media. The foundation hires local builders and medical staff to complete the building services and provide medical care. As stated above, the activity takes place mostly in south american and central american countries. Because the needs of some people are so closely intertwined, murphlife spends about 70% of its time on its building project activities (making sure contractors are paid and projects are moving along is more time intensive) and about 30% of its time on providing food & medical care. The above activities further our main exempt purpose of providing relief for the poor, distressed and underprivileged.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 40
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th 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: 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 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: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -35% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $125K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.