Anai Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581618989
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Franklin, NC, USA
Phone
8285248369
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$118,134
Expenses
$119,751
Assets
$77,243
Liabilities
$93,265

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STANLEY POLANSKI (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BILLY CAMPBELL (VICE PRESIDE)
  • SUSAN ERVIN (SECRETARY)
  • WILLIAM MCLARNEY (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the implementation of grassroots processes for rural sustainable development in the american tropics. To fully integrate livelihood resilience, environmental health, biodiversity conservation and strong committed local organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Anai has been instrumental in providing assistance developing a bottom-up process of change managed by local comunities integrating biodiversity conservation with the creation of sustainable livelihoods for local farming communities. Results from this approach include the creation of more than 20 grass-roots conservation and development ogranizations, latin americas largest organic and fair trade farmers cooperative, support for the launch of 12 community-based ecotourism businesses and the establishment of a national wildlife refuge.

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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 35
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.4%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.21; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $108K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.