Project 2
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 852419122
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Birmingham, MI, USA
- Phone
- 2487524016
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Womens' Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,476
- Expenses
- $24,433
- Assets
- $31,776
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DANIELLE KOVACHEVICH (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ALLISON KUHN (DIRECTOR & SECRETARY)
- TED BALOWSKI (BOARD MEMBER)
- SANDRA ALI (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To charitably assist women desiring to re-enter the workforce through education, guidance, and training on the process of finding, appying for, and interviewing with prospective employers.
What it reported doing in 2024
The burn bright fundraising event was an evening filled with inspirational speeches, exercise, a healthy meal, cocktails, a party favor for every attendee, and sisterhood. Project 2's wonderful community raised funds for the project 2 workshops and events that will continue to help women reach for the stars and burn bright.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.1%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 67.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 49% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95.1% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.