The Kenya Project for Ed and Spiritual Growth Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320010798
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lilburn, GA, USA
Phone
6782077515
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$416,004
Expenses
$384,193
Assets
$294,198
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GIDEON ROBI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • BECKY JOHNSON (CHAIRMAN)
  • GIDEON ROBI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • AUMA REGGY LEWIS (VICE CHAIRMAN)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide opportunities for Christians to be in ministry to the children of Kenya by providing resources and facilitites for their health, education and spiritual development through Student sponsorships from individuals, public and private organizations per IRS section 501(c)(3)

What it reported doing in 2025

The Kenya Projects Special Missions stand as a distinguished extension of its educational and medical endeavors, embodying a holistic vision of service that unites faith, empowerment, and humanitarian relief. Rooted in Christian discipleship and sustained by donor generosity, these missions have consistently advanced both the spiritual and material well being of the communities they serve.Through organized evangelism and mentorship, the missions have continue to strengthen moral guidance and spiritual growth among students and families.n times of crisis, the missions have mobilized food distributions, medical aid, and donor backed campaigns to provide clothing, shoes, and hygiene kitsdelivering immediate relief to vulnerable households. Additionally, outreach teams have supported families with housing repairs, clean water access and sanitation improvements, thereby enhancing living conditions and dignity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 42
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 7.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $375K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.