Bali Cultural Association USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411666464
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Spring, TX, USA
Phone
3019083016
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$451,858
Expenses
$427,006
Assets
$648,941
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joseph Fomukong (President)
  • Valerie A Ngafor (Vice - President)

People named in this filing

  • Alexander Ngati (Board Chair)
  • Winifred K Vanyouga (Board Secretary)
  • Edwin Fogam (Member)

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

- Stimulate, Develop and sustain member interest in Bali- Foster Member support for Development Projects in Bali and Communities in the USA- Promote and Facilitate transition and Integration into the American Culture and Society- Function as a representative body on issues

What it reported doing in 2024

The Bali Cultural Association USA is a non-governmental, non-profit organization dedicated to promoting Bali cultural heritage and fostering the social development of the Bali people of the North West Region of Cameroon, Africa. BCA-USA draws its membership from all persons of Bali Nyonga heritage and friends of BCA-USA. The objectives of BCA-USA are to: Preserve, promote and propagate the Bali Culture Create a forum through which all Bali people and their friends can come together and get acquainted. Disseminate information about cultural activities in Bali and those organized by the association. Create a medium for the discussion of issues affecting Bali people in Bali, the United States and the diaspora as a whole. Encourage Bali people in the United States to be good residents of their host country. Carry out any other legitimate activity ancillary to the associations purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, 9% for grants, and 39% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 375 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $427K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.