Allied Extract

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872282494
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Abingdon, VA, USA
Phone
9125502708
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Migration, Refugee Issues

Reported finances

Revenue
$795,390
Expenses
$772,624
Assets
$385,436
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Harvey Graham-Green (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lydia Novruzov (Chief Financial Officer): $40,000 total reported compensation
  • Harvey Graham-Green (Executive Director): $38,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Allied Extract Afghanistan Inc. is a non-profit corporation that is organized and operated exclusively for charitable educational and or scientific purposes including for such purposes the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations described under Section 501c3 of the Internal Revenue Code or corresponding section of any future federal tax code. The Corporation shall neither have nor exercise any power nor engage directly or indirectly in any activity that would invalidate its status as a corporation that is exempt from federal income tax as an organization described in Section 501c3 of the Code. During the 2024 tax year Allied Extract continued to supporting humanitarian assistance and support in partnership with other Non-Governmental Organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Allied Extract provided the majority of its activities and operations aiding the humanitarian extractions of vulnerable populations abroad. Particularly this fund supported refugees escaping persecution and violence in Ukraine the unlawful invasion by Russia.

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 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 9
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.9%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,410.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.9%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 68.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.9% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $620K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.