Arab Gulf Programme for Development (AGFUND)

Legal name: Arab Gulf Programme for Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522340908
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Riyadh, NY, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Phone
+966 11 441 8888
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$124,323,993
Expenses
$20,486,580
Assets
$964,711,133
Liabilities
$20,260,412

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PRINCE ABDULAZIZ BIN TALAL AI (PRESIDENT/BOARD MEMBER)

Highest reported compensation

  • NASSER BAKER AL KAHTANI (EXEC. DIRECTOR/BOARD MEMBER): $646,407 total reported compensation
  • MUNIRAH AL OTAIBI (FINANCE & ADMIN DEPT. DIRECTOR): $214,994 total reported compensation
  • ZEINA AHMED SAFA (ASSET MGMT UNITE DIRECTOR): $198,252 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To support sustainable human development and poverty alleviation by enabling vulnerable groups to exercise their civil rights and lead a dignified social and economic existence.

What it reported doing in 2024

Microfinance banks-a vision of combating poverty. Provide support for microfinance banks assisting the poor in developing countries. By providing banking services to marginalized segments around the globe, specifically women, youth, rural communities, and small to medium sized enterprises, agfund has become the first organization in arab countries world to establish microfinance institutions for those without such financial resources. Agfund's microfinance service offerings include loans, savings, deposits, current accounts, health and cooperative insurance, remittances, and currency exchange. Over time, agfund's microfinance operations have expanded to include a technical support unit, which provides a means for sharing experiences between microfinancing institutions to improve, make known, and improve upon best practices.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.6%; rating input score 10
  • Program expense ratio: 46.1%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 83.5%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 47.09; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 10 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 9.6% of revenue deployed · 46.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported · 0 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $646K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $763K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.