4Kira4Moms

Legal name: 4Kira4moms Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831719572
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Atlanta, GA, US
Phone
+1 404-999-4261
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$594,451
Expenses
$618,912
Assets
$171,167
Liabilities
$41,927

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charles Johnson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Gabrielle Albert (Executive Dir.): $181,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To end preventable maternal mortality through education, advocacy, and legislation.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization educated the public about the impact of maternal mortality in communities and created significant awareness of the marked increase in maternal deaths in our country, which has more than doubled since 1990. The organization's efforts are aimed at bringing to light, the thousands of women and families who have suffered in this nation from careless and preventable negligence related to childbirth and pregnancy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

MIXED - Program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 47%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 74.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 58% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 64.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 49% of revenue deployed · 47% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $291K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.