4Mati Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454490023
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Paradise Valley, AZ, USA
Phone
6025731550
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,295
Expenses
$49,443
Assets
$77,873

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Keri DeGuzman (President)
  • Brian DeGuzman (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Keri DeGuzman (President)
  • Brian DeGuzman (Vice President)
  • Lishan Aklog (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Supports and develops programs in Ethiopia targeting education, healthcare, and orphan support, with emphasis on projects that incorporate ideas and priorities of local communities and ultimately become self sustainable.

What it reported doing in 2016

The Foundation completed the development of Bread Making and Mittin Project - self sustaining business for the native people. The production was handed over to the works and community of Woliatta Village that continues to benefit from it.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -112.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.5% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $46K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.