Ce12 Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454846018
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Darien, CT, USA
Phone
9172151127
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$511,438
Expenses
$829,615
Assets
$726,472
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSAMARIA CABALLERO STAFFORD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROSAMARIA CABALLERO STAFFORD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $87,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To support the small business sector in cuba by providing education and training to entrepreneurs, as well as to provide advisory services to existing and new businesses.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cfei this is one of the first project-based grants being overseen by the foundation in collaboration with our team on the ground in cuba. The grant supports the development of a dried fruit export production platform, including assistance for a network of fruit growers, a transportation and logistics cooperative, and a dried fruit production facility. The budget also includes offshore legal support and relevant industry expertise. All components of the production chain are privately owned and managed. Funds are disbursed based on detailed supporting invoices, primarily to offshore vendors providing equipment, vehicles, ovens, and other production-related assets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -62.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $708K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.