Developments in Literacy

Legal name: Developments in Literacy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330843213
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Irvine, CA, United States
Phone
(949) 474-5303
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Remedial Reading, Reading Encouragement
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,021,652
Expenses
$2,720,250
Assets
$3,552,668
Liabilities
$27,122

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FIZA SHAH (CEO/DIRECTOR)
  • ANEEQA AKHTAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANEEQA AKHTAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $87,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Developments in Literacy (DIL) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit delivering transformative education to children in underserved communities across Pakistan. ABOUT US Our Leadership Our Staff Latest Financials & Reports Affiliates & Partners Our Privacy Policy OUR WORK Our Approach Community & Government Schools TEAL Teacher Development Tailored Curricula E-Libraries Success Beyond School OUR IMPACT Our Impact Success Stories GET INVOLVED Making a Difference Events Join a National Chapter International Chapters Volunteer Opportunities EVENTS DONATE. Back Our Approach Community & Government Schools TEAL Teacher Development Tailored Curricula E-Libraries Success Beyond School Back Our Impact Success Stories Back Making a Difference Events Join a National Chapter International Chapters Volunteer Opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2025

To educate children living in remote areas of pakistan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% 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 does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.4% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.