Gede Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010581980
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028332670
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,039,647
Expenses
$996,514
Assets
$247,023
Liabilities
$509,186

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JAMILA JENNIFER ABUBAKAR (PRESIDENT & FOUNDER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MR JOHN MINTO (KEY OFFICER- CONSULTANT): $198,573 total reported compensation
  • DR CYNTHIA TICAO (PERFORMANCE DIRECTOR): $100,476 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To work for the benefit of the people of africa by restoring to them the right to a sense of self worth and a life of hope, health and happiness through programs that educate, promote healthy communities and help eliminate the stigma of illness.

What it reported doing in 2015

In 2015, the gede foundation deepened its experience of working with and through partners and collaborators (many of whom have national and international networks), with a view to ensuring the nationwide integration of mental health into existing HIV-AIDS care and support platforms. This initiative has, the foundation believes, a wider resonance in terms of the ways in which any underserved and stigmatized health burden can be integrated into existing health platforms. Lessons learned continue to focus on identifying the necessary skills, resources, knowledge, policies and partners needed to make integration practical, cost effective, and sustainable. Gede has taken the opportunity, in 2015, to continue to build the key skills and partnership required to take and maintain a strong leadership position within mental health and HIV-AIDS in nigeria.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 44
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $173.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.1%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.06; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $891K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.