Aid for Starving Children

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521224507
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Phone
7075283499
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,755,452
Expenses
$2,978,600
Assets
$1,676,651
Liabilities
$156,595

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR MONTE E WILSON (President)
  • PAUL KELLEY (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDY SWEZY (ADMIN DIRECTOR): $164,501 total reported compensation
  • DR MONTE E WILSON (President): $36,000 total reported compensation
  • PAUL KELLEY (Vice President): $19,200 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Aid For Starving Children provides assistance around the world to children and their families by providing food, shelter, clean water, financial assistance, education, and emergency relief to victims of famine, natural disasters, and war.

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide relief and development to the poor and needy through aid and financial support in regions where food, medical care, medicines, medical supplies, education, and shelter are few and far between.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 25
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.8%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 25
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -29.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.8% of revenue deployed · 25.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $750K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 6 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.