Prep4all Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853596607
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
3039109330
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$873,014
Expenses
$530,098
Assets
$345,765
Liabilities
$32,500

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEREMIAH JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEREMIAH JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $140,400 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL CHANCLEY (COMMUNICATIONS & MOBILIZATION MANAGER): $110,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Prep4all works to ensure that the most vulnerable individuals can access HIV prevention and treatment regardless of their race, gender, socioeconomic status, or geographic location. We work with community members and public health experts to create policy solutions that increase access to HIV prevention. Then, we educate the public and government officials on the legal and medical policies that can ensure everyone who needs HIV prevention can get it.

What it reported doing in 2024

We conduct policy research on issues affecting access to HIV care and draft reports summarizing our findings.we then distribute research findings and reports to stakeholder organizations and officials. We also communicate these research findings with the press and public through events, press releases, social media, and targeted communications.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.5%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: 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; 76th 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: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.5% of revenue deployed · 65% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $345K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.