American Foreign Service Association Scholarship Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237045244
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, United States
Phone
(202) 338-4045
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$741,629
Expenses
$601,721
Assets
$18,224,335
Liabilities
$4,225,127

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS YAZDGERDI (PRESIDENT)
  • TINA WONG (STATE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RANDY CHESTER (USAID VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA BURKE (FCS VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN NALAND (RETIREE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EVAN MANGINO (FAS VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ASEGIR SIGFUSSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $261,736 total reported compensation
  • FEMI OSHOBUKOLA (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $177,738 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 AFSA Scholarship Program offers college aid to children of AFSA members whose parents are/were Foreign Service employees. We provide financial aid scholarships to undergraduates and academic merit awards, art merit awards, and a community service award to graduating high school seniors.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships: the afsa scholarship program offers college aid to children of afsa members whos parents are/were foreign service employees. We provide financial aid scholarships to undergraduates and academic merit awards, art merit awards, and a community service award to graduating high school seniors. The above activities could not happen without the generous bequests and donations from those in the foreign service community. No afsa membership dues are used in the afsa scholarship program. This robust afsa member benefit has disbursed more than $4.9 million to 2,500 students in the last 29 years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.9%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 30.29; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 75.6% of revenue deployed · 72.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $435K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 23 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.