Project Backpack
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 770643897
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Maryland Heights, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3149933033
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Children's, Youth Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,457
- Expenses
- $29,385
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JUDY PEARLSTONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MELANIE LAPIDUS (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JUDY PEARLSTONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MELANIE LAPIDUS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- RANDI MOZENTER (DIRECTOR)
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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Project backpack is a unique organization that helps at-risk children without distinction of race, religion, sex or nationality who are removed from their homes and placed in emergency careduring crisis situations. We strive to have significant impact on their lives by providing backpacks or infant totes filled with new personal necessity and comfort items. They are distributed through area police departments, social service agencies, and other 501(c)(3) organizations.
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 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 9
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -355.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -17% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2023
- 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 4/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.