Project Right

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043265420
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Grove Hall, MA, USA
Phone
6175415454
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,773,527
Expenses
$1,879,587
Assets
$394,095
Liabilities
$458,896

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD SALMON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMMANUEL TIKILI (CO-DIRECTOR): $81,810 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL KOZU (CO-DIRECTOR): $79,310 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Project r.i.g.h.t., inc.'s mission is to strengthen and coordinate existing services and programs in the grove hall area of roxbury. Public safety, crime prevention, electoral advocacy, zoning and housing, and economic development issues through grass root models of sustainable resident organizing are the main goals of the organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Since its inception, the agency has worked on public safety, crime prevention, civic engagement, zoning and housing, and economic development issues through grass root models of sustainable resident organizing. The agency has formed a very strong and unique collaboration that has been highlighted as a model in numerous publications. At present, there are over forty organizations represented in the collaborative. The agency places a priority on increasing the number of residents involved in the neighborhood associations, crime watches, block watches, and tenant associations within our target area. The agency identifies resident leadership on unorganized streets to assist them in organizing their streets.the agency promotes resident and youth leadership development and neighborhood stabilization through organizing, action, advocacy, and coalition building. The agency's philosophy is based on the concept: "neighborhood stabilization is the most effective anti-crime activity." the agency's vision of social change is when grove hall is stable and healthy and no longer impacted by barriers of racial disparities that limit access to services and opportunities. Our plans include to continue with our outreach and organizing initiatives, increase our emphasis on engaging youth in positive activities with a special focus on female teenagers, expand after-school programming opportunities, and support education advocacy by parents and students (student transportation, budget and school assignment process).the agency's overall goals are to improve the actual safety and wellbeing in the grove hall community; and to increase the number of young people engaged in positive activities and opportunities. We recently implemented a trauma training program so that young peoplehave a better understanding of the traumatic impact violence has on individuals, families and the community, and learn about dealing with the trauma and the resources available for that. We believe that this understanding, in turn, leads to a decrease in violence. We also initiated programming focused on middle and high school female students that addresses both street and domestic violence prevention. This effort will improve their self-esteem while informing them about health issues that women in the grove hall community face. These new initiatives, with our existing efforts, will decrease violence in grove hall and help improve the quality of life in our community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $73.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd 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; 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.16; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.7% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.