Executives Without Borders USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262790154
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
8007906134
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,799
Expenses
$163,493
Assets
$19,582
Liabilities
$22,116

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT GOODWIN (PRESIDENT/CHAIR & SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • YARON KAMINSKI (VICE CHAIR): $41,538 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Executives without borders USA serves as the bridge between those in the non-profit world and those in the business world, making it easier for them to work together and drive better results for those who need them most.

What it reported doing in 2015

Haiti: plastic recycling. Ramase lajan, meaning "picking up money" in creol, is a nationwide jobs and plastic recycling program developed by executives without borders and various international and local partners. The program created a network of neighborhood community collection centers across the country where haitians turn in recyclables and are paid a fair market price for their hard work. The community centers are operated by haitian entrepreneurs who work with their staff to crush and transport these recyclables to a local business, haiti recycling, who transforms the materials into commodities that are sold on the world market.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.5%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -30%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -39.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -36.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.5% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.