Child Family Health International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943145385
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
El Cerrito, CA, USA
Phone
4159579000
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,890,066
Expenses
$3,000,453
Assets
$663,457
Liabilities
$748,704

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Robin Young (Executive Dir.): $142,787 total reported compensation
  • Mariah Blevins (Director): $70,847 total reported compensation
  • Dr Cecilia Uribe (Director): $53,155 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Child Family Health International is dedicated to transformative Global Health Education programs, research, and thought leadership emphasizing community leadership, global citizenship, and ethical engagement.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, CFHI facilitated immersive global health education programs for 844 future health leaders. CFHI continued its commitment to Fair-Trade Learning (FTL), completing a participatory process from 20222025 to define a global health-specific FTL rubric to ensure ethical engagement and quality across all program sites. CFHI advanced the field of global health through published research: In 2025, CFHI collaborated with seven institutions to publish a mixed-methods analysis in the Journal of Medical Internet Research regarding income-based disparities in virtual global health activities. Additionally, CFHI became the institutional home and fiscal sponsor for the Community-Based Global Learning Collaborative, a network dedicated to advancing community-based global learning and research. In 2025, CFHI doubled its prior year's funding commitment, awarding $146,685 in scholarships to 84 recipients from diverse backgrounds, including participants from low- and middle-income countries and first-generation students. The organization allocated $26,625 in Community Health and Professional Development Grants to support 10 locally led projects, ranging from mobile clinics in Uganda to sustainable hydroponics in the Philippines.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $886K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.