Villages in Partnership Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 452442802
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Allentown, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 6097724753
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,682,648
- Expenses
- $1,902,299
- Assets
- $3,687,131
- Liabilities
- $61,558
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROBERT D RHOAD (PRESIDENT/CH)
Highest reported compensation
- LIZ HEINZEL-NELSON (EXECUTIVE DI): $80,016 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Villages in partnership (vip) is a faith-based christian oganization that implements sustainable development projects in malawi, africa, in the areas of water & sanitation, food security, health care, education, economic development and infrastructure.
What it reported doing in 2024
Through extensive communications and planning with our sister organization in malawi (villages in partnership international), vip supported the following development projects (through grants and in-kind donations of project supplies) among others in 2023; completed construction of the khanda health center; constructed 13 houses for cyclone freddy victims; drilled 10 wells, providing clean water access to 573 additional households; provided 75 bags of grain to 129 households; supported 38 farmers growing cash crops using large scale irrigation; vaccinated 26,000 chickens across 29 villages; dewormed 1,685 goats in 559 households; enrolled 631 children in early childhood education; supported 10 students in vocational schools; and provided 10 students with scholarships to attend college.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 43
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 28.2%; rating input score 28
- Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 59.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 28.2% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 28/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.