Nonviolent Peaceforce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352197019
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Richfield, MN, USA
Phone
6128710005
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,955,045
Expenses
$5,268,923
Assets
$4,875,912
Liabilities
$2,361,865

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNA ZAROS (DIRECTOR OF ADVANCEMENT): $152,544 total reported compensation
  • ROSLYN LEE (HEAD OF MISSION): $129,522 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We protect civilians in violent conflicts through unarmed strategies. We build peace side by side with local communities. We advocate for the wider adoption of these approaches to safeguard human lives and dignity. We envision a worldwide culture of peace in which conflicts within and between communities and countries are managed through nonviolent means.

What it reported doing in 2025

Nonviolent peaceforce (np) is an international nonprofit organization that uses unarmed civilian protection (ucp) methodologies to deter and prevent violence in locations around the world where civilians are under threat of violent conflict. Np conducts ucp programming in the united states in addition to supporting international programs with administration, fundraising, communications, and advocacy. International programs do not rely solely on funds raised in the u.s. And the majority of np's expenses are reflected in tax reports and financial audits filed in other countries and not in the united states. Np teams operate in the philippines, south sudan, sudan, myanmar, ukraine, iraq and the united states. The u.s. Office provides support for new project exploration and start up and provides staff welfare support. These activities are essential for effective programming and to obtain additional project funds. Np also conducted several trainings to community groups on de-escalation and conflict transformation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -78.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.