Connecther

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264235366
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5125605608
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$697,282
Expenses
$745,549
Assets
$203,844
Liabilities
$6,290

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FAYRUZ BENYOUSEF (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • FAYRUZ BENYOUSEF (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNA WESSAM YOUSSEF (TREASURER)
  • SAMIRA KHAN (MEMBER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Connecther invests in women and girls by elevating their status through stories, film, and relief projects.

What it reported doing in 2024

Connecther uses authentic representation in film and storytelling to uplift women and girls around the world, ensuring that the people closest to an issue are the ones telling its story. The annual connecther film festival showcases and awards filmmakers whose work centers womens lived experience, from economic independence to education to health, while the connercther fellowship developes emerging women storytelling through mentorship and production support. Through connecther scholars, the organization provides direct educational scholarships to girls and young women, opening doors to education as a path toward economic independence and reliance. And through its relief and rapid response initiatives, connecther delivers, on-the-ground support to women and girls in communities facing acute crisis, training and supporting filmmakers to document their own communities stories.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 52
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 22%; rating input score 22; 26th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -6.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.8% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $696K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 29 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • 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: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.