Projectq

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813740319
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-T 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2136178442
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$962,580
Expenses
$1,078,261
Assets
$77,174
Liabilities
$54,314

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MADIN LOPEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MADIN LOPEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $88,931 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Projectq provides free gender affirming haircuts, self empowering workshops, food & hygiene boxes, gender affirming clothing, chest binders, menstrual products, and so much more to lgbtqia+ youth experiencing homelessness.

What it reported doing in 2022

The program for housing insecure queer youth of color in the los angeles area experiencing nutrition scarcity (food & hygiene boxes). This monthly program provides free care packages of fresh vegetables, dry goods and hygiene products to service receivers with the intention of nourishing their minds and eliminating one obstacle from their path. Though this program is designed to meet the needs of young trans people of color, everyone is welcome.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 71.8%; rating input score 72; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 60.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 40.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -43% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $752K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.