Range Of Motion Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202603927
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
2062717483
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,899,265
Expenses
$2,263,101
Assets
$1,030,840
Liabilities
$241,567

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Shawn Faessler (Treasurer - Vice President)
  • Eric Neufeld (President)
  • David Krupa (Executive Director)
  • Jonathan Naber (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Krupa (Executive Director): $95,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Romps mission is to ensure access to high-quality prosthetic care for underserved people improving their mobility and independence.

What it reported doing in 2024

CBR Program The Community-Based Rehabilitation CBR Program: Delivers personalized care within communities pairing participants with Mobilizers who provide bi-monthly support at home. These community rehabilitation workers assist across pre-prosthetic prosthetic and post-prosthetic stages focusing on physical rehabilitation mental health and productive activities. Graduates receive ongoing support from community contacts ensuring long-term care continuity. ROMP collects detailed outcome measures showing significant improvements in mental health mobility economic stability and quality of life. By leveraging mobile technology and local volunteers the CBR Program has reduced costs per participant while expanding its reach across multiple provinces in Guatemala. The CBR program graduated 140 individuals from its mobility and empowerment course 11 patients received surgical limb revisions through public hospitals 39 water filters delivered to homes without clean drinking water 19 PT students trained through clinical rotations 28 participants added to labor inclusion database 130+ community contacts and peer mentors mobilized and 100+ group and individual therapy sessions provided.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 44.6%; rating input score 45; 28th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 49 of 50 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.