Persecution Project

Legal name: Persecution Project Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541976312
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Culpeper, VA, United States
Phone
(888) 201-5245
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,915,432
Expenses
$4,448,378
Assets
$1,325,721
Liabilities
$32,536

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRADFORD PHILLIPS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRADFORD PHILLIPS (PRESIDENT): $207,206 total reported compensation
  • HAGAZI KEBEDE (CO & FO): $194,772 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

All who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted (2 Timothy 3:12). Persecution Project partners with local pastors and churches seeking to reach their communities with the love of Christ in WORD and DEED—assisting local churches in providing for orphans and widows, distributing crisis relief and shelter items to displaced and homeless, encouraging the persecuted through Scripture resources (print and audio), and working with local authorities to provide medical and safe water.

What it reported doing in 2025

Medical services: currently the splm-n secretariat of health administrates medical programs in 17 of 19 counties of the state of southern kordofan in sudan. In 2025, 235 remote medical facilities, including six rural hospitals, received medicines and medical supplies from persecution project foundation. Medicines & supplies: after war returned to the nuba in 2011, one of the most critical survival needs identified by persecution project was medicine. We delivered our first major consignment of medicine to the nuba region in 2012. We have continued providing this vital necessity in the years since. In 2025, persecution project provided the nuba medical consortium (overseen by the local secretariat of health) with its largest contribution - over 80 percent of all medicine delivered to southern kordofan. This medical consignment included medicines for respiratory illnesses, anti-malarials, antibiotics, anti-fungals, analgesics, syringes, multivitamins, bandages, and other medical supplies. Persecution project also delivered shipments of therapeutic food for use in treating those severely wasted (mostly children). Hospital administration: persecution project directly sponsors the administration of two hospitals: tujor hospital in dellami county and gigaiba referral hospital. Persecution project provides medicines, fuel, and funds for staff salaries, construction, etc. To tujor and gigaiba. Gigaiba alone treated more than 88,890 patients in 2025. Numbers have increased due to the influx of more than 2.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) to the nuba since april 2023. Gigaiba hospital construction & volunteer medical teams: persecution project has been sponsoring the construction of a volunteer medical unit at gigaiba hospital toward the goal of facilitating short and long term medical and community health workers. In addition to basic construction at gigaiba referral hospital, persecution project also sponsored multiple medical staff training events, as well as the annual subscription for vsat (satellite internet) that we had earlier installed to facilitate communication. Gigaiba hospital spiritual discipleship: in 2025, working in tandem with the local church, persecution project continued a discipleship program to provide spiritual services to the hospital staff and patients. Once per week, a team of two pastors visited the hospital to provide spiritual counseling and emotional support to dr. Martin and the patients and staff at gigaiba hospital.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 12 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $163K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.