Project Amazon

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541383660
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Apopka, FL, USA
Phone
3092632299
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,033,958
Expenses
$3,359,487
Assets
$1,499,337
Liabilities
$408,495

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF HRUBIK (CEO/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF HRUBIK (CEO/DIRECTOR): $12,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fulfill the great commission given by jesus christ to make disciples of all nations.

What it reported doing in 2017

1) conducted fifteen extended river trips with teams composed of brazilians and north americans. These trips included social outreach in the areas of dentistry and general medical attention using doctors and dentists from paz churches. Approximately 1,200 people received dental treatment and 1,600 received medical services. Local paz churches independently made another twenty trips providing social assistance and involving evangelistic outreach.2) twelve church buildings were constructed in the interior of the amazon river basin and work was initiated on another four.3) working through the brazilian paz church, food and social assistance was provided for the people in the paz church in venezuela as well as for refugees fleeing from venezuela.4) provided financial assistance and oversight of church planting teams in japan, italy, and portugal, all of which continue to grow.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 62.3%; rating input score 62; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -65.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 6 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.