Spiritual Counterfeits Project

Legal name: Spiritual Counterfeits Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510169830
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Pasadena, CA, United States
Phone
6264379020
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,159
Expenses
$77,645
Assets
$1,137,739
Liabilities
$13,087

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK HARRIS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK HARRIS (President): $48,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To examine the cultural shift in the USA from its Judeo-Christian heritage to a society of conflicting worldviews; to provide biblical critiques of cultural and spiritual trends and movements; to equip the church with information and tools to counter modern unbiblical trends; and to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ through multiple channels.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scp produced two journals and two newsletters reaching an immediate audience ofapproximately 700 regular readers and an estimated secondary audience of severalhundred more. The goal of these publications was to (1) expose the variousdeceptive spins in the belief systems that are present in contemporary spiritualtrends in the secular marketplace in the USA, and (2) contrast these systems with the truth, sanity and winsomeness of the christian worldview.

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 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 40
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.65; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 61.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $48K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.