Project Able

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810641200
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Salem, OR, USA
Phone
5033633260
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,759,975
Expenses
$1,641,229
Assets
$660,327
Liabilities
$61,709

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CLAY PETERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TINA SMITH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CLAY PETERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $83,000 total reported compensation
  • REBECCA TISH (SECRETARY): $66,139 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide peer-to-peer services and support for individuals recovering from mental health and/or co-occurring issues. These supports and services embrace human dignity, expand the capacity for individuals to recover and promote lifelong empowerment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Peer support - project able provides peer-to-peer services and supports for individuals recovering from mental health and co-occurring challenges. These supports and services embrace human dignity, recognize the capacity for individuals to recover, and promote life-long empowerment.

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 89% 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: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $60.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.7%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.