Afghan Girls Financial Assistance Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475527310
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Skillman, NJ, USA
Phone
6094744489
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,852,087
Expenses
$779,153
Assets
$2,385,091
Liabilities
$144,209

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joseph Highland (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Phyllis Van Hook (Secretary): $27,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

AGFAF helps secure scholarships and provides financial, academic and emotional support to qualified Afghan women seeking college education, graduate or professional school education. AGFAF also provides scholarships to qualified male students who demonstrate a commitment to promoting gender, economic and social equality in Afghanistan. In addition, we support student-led projects designed to improve and enrich the lives of people in Afghanistan and Afghan refugees.

What it reported doing in 2024

Since 2008, AGFAF has assisted over 250 Afghan students, primarily women, in obtaining an education. Students have pursued studies at the high school, college, graduate and professional school levels. AGFAF helps students secure placements and has provided financial assistance to cover expenses not fully covered by scholarships. These students understand that education is not only an important step to a successful career path, but a tool for liberation and leadership. In addition to obtaining an education, AGFAF students undertake projects designed to improve the lives of the Afghan people. This work helps them develop project management skills and provides an opportunity to experience the benefits of helping others.

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 96% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs 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: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.8%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $472.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 4.7%; rating input score 5; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 16th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.06; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 35.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.8% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $748K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.