Dove Uganda Children's Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204935765
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Longview, WA, USA
Phone
8156811412
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$245,025
Expenses
$239,374
Assets
$102,604
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EPHRAIM TUMUSIIME (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLY ANN KNOBEL (ASSOC EXEC DIRECTOR): $10,752 total reported compensation
  • STEVE BECK (EXEC DIRECTOR): $10,712 total reported compensation
  • KYRA STROM (BOOKKEEPER): $9,427 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of dove uganda childrens fund as stated in our bylaws is as follows: to demonstrate the everlasting love of god and help the children of uganda have a prosperous future through sponsorship and to share the good news of the gospel through compassion, care and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

We work in partnership with parents of nyakagando nursery and primary school, hope kebir nursery and primary school, and peace yumbe nursery and primary school to provide much of the education of our sponsored children. We have ministry centers in kampala, wakiso, kiryandongo, arua and yumbe. We train the children in skills like tailoring, hair dressing, cookery, motor vehicle repair, soap making, videography, farming, introduction to computers and bicycle repair. We provide assistance for well drilling and fresh water. Some children are treated for external parasites such as ring worm and instestinal worms. Training sessions are held for parents, teachers, pupils and other members of the community on preventing re-infestations of these maladies. Funds are being sought to improve and expand the toilet facilities at a number of our centers. Teachers, parents, and other members of the community are trained on childrens rights, child abuse and the value of education so the children can grow up to be better citizens. Several seminars and church visitations are made during the year to benefit the childrens spiritual development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.3%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $204K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.