Peaceful Families Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113840138
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
(540) 324-8818
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Spouse Abuse, Prevention
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$378,137
Expenses
$331,549
Assets
$129,109
Liabilities
$8,742

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENISE BERTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BONITA MCGEE (PRESIDENT AND TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DENISE BERTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $64,636 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Eliminating Family Based Violence with a Focus on Muslim Communities

What it reported doing in 2025

Pfp researches and creates culturally/linguistically appropriate programs, materials and curriculums to address the issue of family-based violence across the life span from parenting, young adults, marriage and divorce. In the past year pfp completed two new curriculums: peaceful parents (training in nonviolent discipline); and the future is futtuwah (a leadership rpogram for young men) sponsored by the us department of justice. Pfp conducted the first training of trainers of a third curriculum: peaceful partings (addressing grief, separation, divorce and co-parenting in a non-conflictual resolution focused manner). Research projects providing evidence-based practices were completed int he areas of training and male prespectives on family-based violence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $331.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $289K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.