Ama Charitable Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271876544
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013
- Location
- Bedminster, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 7322084424
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,960
- Expenses
- $10,011
- Assets
- $541
- Liabilities
- $55
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- DR WILLIAM BENNISON (Director)
- DR PETER WENTWORTH (Director)
- GEORGE J PALMER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Assist philanthropic organizations in fund raising to build a community of philanthropic people focused on helping to address world issues, bring together like-minded people to address the problems of these times and create a greater sense of social responsibility in our communities.
What it reported doing in 2013
Assist philanthropic organizations in fund raising
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 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.8%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -57.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.8% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.