Afghan Health Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850906399
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Auburn, WA, USA
Phone
2532376214
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,938,572
Expenses
$1,881,188
Assets
$2,500,779
Liabilities
$4,668

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM HAMIDI (PRESIDENT)
  • MIR ARGHANDIWAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NAVID HAMIDI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NAVID HAMIDI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $161,681 total reported compensation
  • ARIANA ANJAZ (SENIOR DIRECTOR): $139,060 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 mission of afghan health initiative is to serve the immigrant and refugee population in Washington state by promoting community-based public health interventions which target social determinants of health thereby increasing equal access to health, education, and economic independence.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ahi's health and wellness programs focus on prevention, education, and holistic well-being. Our team has:- conducted home visits and education campaigns to reduce harmful health exposures, such as lead, impacting immigrant and refugee children.- partnered with medical professionals to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate health education and screenings.- delivered maternal health education, referrals, and support for families with young children through workshops and outreach.- expanded into health literacy, caregiver wellness, and senior support groups.- led community-based participatory research (cbpr) projects, including collaborations on environmental health issues such as pfas and lead in consumer products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $66.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.3% of revenue deployed · 92.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 6 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.