Friends of Kisengo Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813326724
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2020
- Location
- Parkland, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8642284328
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,112
- Expenses
- $16,123
- Assets
- $680
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN C BOAN (PRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN)
People named in this filing
- JOHN C BOAN (PRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN)
- ASA-LENA LOOF (DIRECTOR, SECRETARY)
- WILLIAM M LOWE JR (DIRECTOR, TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Friends of kisengo, inc. (the organization") is a Florida not-for-profit corporation that will operate as a charitable organization to provide needed services to benefit the population of kisengo, a village in the katanga province of the democratic republic of the congo ("drc") and surrounding areas. Specifically, the organization will conduct and/or fund activities in support of infrastucture, health care, education and enviromental development. It may conduct some activities directly, and will fund some activities by making grants to one or more charitable organizations already working in the area.additional examples of the types of activities and programs that the organization hopes to sponsor and/or fund in the kisengo area include schools, medical clinics, fresh water wells, solar street lighting and other infrastucture improvements intended to improve the local quality of life.
What it reported doing in 2020
The organization funded a school in kisengo.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.3%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 99.3% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.