The Reckoning Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920890126
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Falls Church, VA, USA
Phone
8778295500
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,529,754
Expenses
$1,729,257
Assets
$307,073
Liabilities
$31,074

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Janine di Giovanni (Executive Director & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Janine di Giovanni (Executive Director & CEO): $199,992 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Reckoning Project fights for truth and justice, and against disinformation and impunity, both in the court of public opinion and the courts of law.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the tax year, The Reckoning Project (TRP) advanced its mission to document grave human rights violations and promote accountability for atrocity crimes. TRP expanded its investigative work, collecting and verifying testimonies to support international justice efforts. TRP strengthened partnerships with legal, academic, and civil society institutions and contributed expertise to numerous global forums on accountability and the rule of law. TRP also invested in training and outreach, equipping local researchers and journalists with tools for ethical documentation and analysis. Through sustained media engagement and public education, TRP amplified survivor voices and advanced informed dialogue on conflict, justice, and human rights. These activities reinforced TRPs role as a bridge between documentation and prosecution, ensuring that credible evidence from conflict zones informs global mechanisms for truth and accountability.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 93%; rating input score 93; 40th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 90% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -60.4% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $200K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.