Douc Langur Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261582234
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8582772710
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protection of Endangered Species

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$292,215
Expenses
$164,212
Assets
$1,584,691
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOIS K LIPPOLD (President)

People named in this filing

  • LOIS K LIPPOLD (President)
  • GEORGE HOOVER JR (Director)
  • VU NGOC THANH (Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The douc langur a 501c 3 non-profit conservation, research and education organization dedicated to protecting douc langur monkey and their wild habitat to ensure that they will survive in their home ranges for future generations. Provides grants to the vietnam national university and forest protection department to fund various projects such as the rocky stream survey, feeding ecology for douc langurs, snare and trap removal, equipment purchases for rangers at son tra reserve. Supports activities of the dlf at son tra nature reserve and chu mom ray national park, vietnam. Projects include: feeding ecology of douc langurs, snare and trap removal, school education projects, douc langue food plant analysis, monitoring of doucs and gibbons.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provides grants to the vietnam national university and forest protection department to fund various projects such as the rocky stream survey, feeding ecology for douc langurs, snare and trap removal, equipment purchases for rangers at son tra reserve. Supports activities of the dlf at son tra nature reserve and chu mom ray national park, vietnam. Projects include feeding ecology of douc langurs, snare and trap removal, school education projects, douc langue food plant analysis, monitoring of doucs and gibbons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 43.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.65; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.3% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $162K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.