Dignity Freedom Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 412075995
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- Nampa, ID, USA
- Phone
- 7572339110
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,805,971
- Expenses
- $1,575,565
- Assets
- $1,662,454
- Liabilities
- $438,961
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- JACQUE CORK (EXECUTIVE DI): $92,700 total reported compensation
- SCOTT MITCHELL (TREASURER): $39,600 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW CORK (BOARD MEMBER): $20,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Dignity freedom network's mission is to help the most marginalized and vulnerable people in south asia by providing education, healthcare, and economic empowerment opportunities in a process we call the community transformation model. The programs we support are led and staffed by indian nationals, and dfn USA is part of the international alliance that is inter-racial, inter-caste and international, working together to contribute to the unity, integrity, and greatness of india.
What it reported doing in 2020
Humanitarian: providing healthcare through a large network of community healthcare works and clinics and offering economic opportunity through vocation training, self-help groups, and micro-finance initiatives with impact in 6,000 communities all around india.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.7%; rating input score 54
- Program expense ratio: 61.5%; rating input score 62
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 53.7% of revenue deployed · 61.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $969K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.