The Library Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201347443
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6232023423
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,239
Expenses
$87,799
Assets
$85,520
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Thomas Stader (Chairman)
  • Donn Garton (Director)
  • Philip McCrea (Director)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The organization promotes children's literacy in underfunded schools and community centers. The organization donates books, establishes libraries, conducts literacy programs, conducts teacher training, and supports parents.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provided grants of $35,585 for libraries, literacy programs, teacher training, and support for parents. Other program service expenses were: professional fees $426, bank fees $58, software $382, payroll expenses $40,796, travel $5,216, and website $125.

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 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 53.5%; rating input score 54

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -61.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.1% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 53.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.