Peruvian Hearts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200769896
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Golden, CO, USA
Phone
3035262756
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$428,189
Expenses
$461,361
Assets
$652,327
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel Dodson (Executive Director)
  • Judith Dodson (President, Director (Chair))
  • Rocco Dodson (Vice President, Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel Dodson (Executive Director): $73,750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Peruvian Hearts works to end poverty and gender inequality by educating girls and creating women leaders in Peru. We enable young women to embrace education and to believe in their own power and abilities to dream and create a better life beyond the conditions into which they were born.

What it reported doing in 2024

Peruvian Hearts scholars program provides 40 impoverished young women in Peru with full educational scholarships to attend universities in Peru. We provide our scholars with access to mentors, opportunities for empowerment and to participate in service work. The young women we support come from families with extremely limited economic resources and all of them have dealt with hardship. In addition to academic scholarships, we provide our scholars with access to regular medical exams and cover any healthcare needs while they are in our program. We give our scholars access to a program psychologist, academic advisor, personal and professional mentors, and civic and community leaders. We put a particular emphasis on the personal growth and character development of each of our scholars, in addition to finishing their degrees at university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $381K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.