Fund for American Diplomacy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526078372
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023384045
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$210,871
Expenses
$606,365
Assets
$2,350,573
Liabilities
$2,602,345

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS YAZDGERDI (PRESIDENT)
  • TINA WONG (STATE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RANDY CHESTER (USAID VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA BURKE (FCS VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EVAN MANGINO (FAC VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN NALAND (RETIREE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ASEGIR SIGFUSSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $261,736 total reported compensation
  • FEMI OSHOBUKOLA (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $177,738 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Educate various public segments on the critical importance of diplomacy and the role of the of the u.s. Foreign service in keeping america secure and prosperous. The u.s. Foreign service is america's first line of defense.

What it reported doing in 2024

Essay contest: the foreign service national high school essay contest began as a program of the 75th anniversary celebration and has been continued by the fund due to its success. The contest is open to u.s. Students in grades nine through twelve and includes cash prizes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $74.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.1%; rating input score 88; 51st 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -187.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.88; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.11; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $533K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 23 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.