Shift Project Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452779314
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2124971176
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,092,847
Expenses
$4,071,708
Assets
$4,117,731
Liabilities
$1,353,549

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Caroline Rees (President)
  • Rachel Davis (Vice President)
  • Mark Hodge (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Caroline Rees (President): $252,094 total reported compensation
  • Rachel Davis (Vice President): $179,062 total reported compensation
  • Cynthia Burns (COO): $165,567 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At Shift, we have one purpose: to transform how business gets done in order to ensure respect for peoples lives and dignity. We believe that the best way to advance our mission is by working directly with Businesses to help shape their practices, culture and behavior and by working with Governments, Financial Institutions, civil society and other market actors to embed the right requirements and incentives into the frameworks within which business operates. Our work is based on the international standard of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

What it reported doing in 2024

Business engagement through this program, shift works with leading global companies at both strategic and operational levels, helping them build the vision, systems and capacity they need to implement the ungps. We also work with industry associations and multistakeholder initiatives that support implementation of the ungps.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $40.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $252K · 18 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.