Caring for Cambodia Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203645945
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
6095582710
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$610,667
Expenses
$1,045,159
Assets
$848,347
Liabilities
$91,399

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMIE AMELIO (FOUNDER AND): $25,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Caring for cambodia's philosophy is that only through education can true change occur. In addition to educating the whole child and providing the supplies needed to attend school, cfc gives its students the tools for success in life after school. Through this approach, cfc changes the lives of its students, their families, and even the surrounding communities. In addition to its renowned teacher training program that ensures a world- class education including life skills, cfc also provides its students with clean water, two nutritious meals a day, school uniforms, personal hygiene supplies, and bicycles, in order to get to school. Cfc gives village residents the necessary tools to change behaviors that contribute to disease and poverty.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funding of student services: classroom educational supplies, food for thought program, internet service, technology license and support, government required school uniforms, medical supplies (first aid supplies, toothbrush & toothpaste, hygiene kits, glasses, female supplies), health & hygiene education, transportation, gender equity program, career prep program, physical education supplies and life skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -71.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 66.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $696K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.