Better Healthcare for Africa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263379382
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Gahanna, OH, USA
Phone
6145600848
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,843
Expenses
$57,047
Assets
$150,097
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Darrell E Ward (President)
  • Kenneth Schafermeyer (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Darrell E Ward (President)
  • Kenneth Schafermeyer (Vice President)
  • Lowell Schnipper MD (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Better healthcare for africa (bha) is a secular, non-political, charitable organization working to improve healthcare in africa with a focus on reducing suffering from cancer, improving maternal health and helping hospitals meet critical needs. Efforts supported by bha include practical and effective cervical cancer screening, breast cancer detection through the use of breast examination, HIV awareness, cancer education for healthcare professionals and communities, and education for orphans.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Raskob Foundation provided a grant for 14000.00 that supported cervical cancer screening, treatment, prevention and education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.2%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 24.5%; rating input score 25

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.63; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.2% of revenue deployed · 24.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.