Amistad International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942737593
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Auburn, CA, USA
Phone
6503870382
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$423,795
Expenses
$480,959
Assets
$526,748
Liabilities
$779

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOREN SEIBOLD (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN KOTOSKE (Executive Direc): $12,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Amistad International helps with humanitarian, self-help, and educational programs for impoverished communities. We strive to empower people, helping to develop the skills and knowledge needed for sustenance of life, promotion of health and preservation of cultural identity.

What it reported doing in 2025

Kenya - grow biointensive agriculture centre/kenya (g-biack): in 2025, grow biointensive agriculture centre/kenya (g-biack) was able to purchase additional land for their teaching farm with the help of a $5,000 grant from amistad. The new parcel adjacent to their current farm expands their agriculture teaching land for students studying coming to the 18-month program.amistad also provided the support of g-biack's tailoring teacher, moses mbugua, for one year as well as the funds for the completion of their new indigenous seed savings business. G-biack is now able to save, store and sell seed for income to support the agriculture school.in july and august 2025, the g-biack program trained over 300 farmers from diverse african regions. The program emphasized soil health as the foundation of sustainable agriculture, equipping participants with skills in composting, soil preparation, crop rotation, cover cropping, and ecological pest management.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $37.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 12 filed program accomplishments · $433K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • 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 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.