Communities Organizing for Haitian Engagement and Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412008684
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6517056247
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$669,616
Expenses
$614,664
Assets
$529,907
Liabilities
$2,171

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NICAISE AVIGNON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NICAISE AVIGNON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $51,367 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cofhed's mission is to partner with marginalized communities in the mountains of southwestern haiti to assist them in discovering, creating, and realizing their own vision of socioeconomic development for lasting transformation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Kore tifi violence prevention programin rural haiti, the acceptance of aggression and violence toward girls results in considerable unspoken distress. The objective of our kore tifi/power to girls violence prevention program is to establish a safe and empowering community environment for girls, enhance their resilience, and equip them with the necessary tools and resources to advocate for their own safety and well-being. Our vision is to foster supportive communities that actively oppose the abuse of girls. We are dedicated to creating environments rich in knowledge, skills, and strategies aimed at transforming social norms that are detrimental to girls. This approach empowers girls to thrive in secure spaces, free from harm.we are working collaboratively with communities by implementing the kore tifi/power to girls! Methodology from depase fronty, a local organization associated with beyond borders in jacmel, haiti (http://repansepouvwa.org/). Over a three-year partnership, their team will provide mentorship, training, and coaching to support girls within our rural partner communities.participatory action researchour citizen engagement participatory research effort is centered around three main themescitizenship, state engagement, and security. Co-researchers for this project are mostly high school students. Our goal is to understand how haitians define citizenship and their perceptions of how the state regards them as citizens. This involves delving into both personal and collective interpretations of what it means to be haitian, as well as how that identity connects with their role as citizens. We seek to collect insights on how individuals feel acknowledgedor overlookedby the state, along with their views on the rights and responsibilities associated with citizenship. The purpose of this research is to: amplify voices: the project gives a platform to historically excluded rural citizens, ensuring they are represented in national discussions. Prioritize local solutions: communities will develop and propose their own solutions, fostering ownership of the political process. Foster sustainable leadership: the project builds local capacity by training co-researchers, ensuring ongoing dialogue and empowerment. Contribute to national dialogue: research findings will be synthesized and presented to haitian government officials and civil society, contributing to more inclusive and effective governance solutions.the local government mapping and citizen engagement participatory research involves conducting a baseline assessment of local government and constituent engagement across the communes of camp-perrin and maniche. The project aims to create a directory of local government officials, including mayors, members of the conseil d'administration de la section communale (casec), and assemble des sections communales (asec). It will gather qualitative data through focus groups and interviews with both local government representatives and citizens to understand the capacity of local governments to engage with constituents and support inclusive elections. This work is intended to inform future governance interventions and contribute to increasing citizen participation in the political process.community-led system change we continue to support communities as they take a wider lens at the root causes of the issues they have identified and prioritized during their participatory appraisal last year. It is a messy and emergent process that requires courageous dialogues, but they are willing to go through the process. Two communities have initiated tangible steps to implement sustainable solutions in response to the high cost of tuition. For example, community members pulled their funds together to open a bank account and then collaborated to convert an unused plot of land into a productive vegetable and yellow yams garden. As these initiatives progress, they provide inspirational models for other communities seeking to make their own impact.a

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 72.9%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 8.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 72.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $448K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $51K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.