Global Fund for Assistance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863361537
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dover, DE, USA
Phone
3022176930
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,005,000
Expenses
$0
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Louison Mbombo (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Rajesh Kumar Patel (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Dr Louison Mbombo (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Dr Amina El-Sayed (Chair)
  • Rajesh Kumar Patel (Executive Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Global Fund for Assistance Inc is to mobilize resources and connect donors to high-impact organizations worldwide, supporting humanitarian relief, poverty reduction, and sustainable development initiatives that improve lives and strengthen communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the reporting year, the organization successfully implemented its Global Fundraising and Grant Allocation Program, mobilizing approximately $2,005,000 in charitable contributions to support high-impact nonprofit initiatives. The organization focused on identifying and supporting groups that address critical global challenges, including humanitarian relief, food insecurity, health access, and community development. By employing targeted outreach and donor engagement strategies, it expanded its funding base and strengthened relationships with contributors and partners. A significant portion of the funds raised was allocated to qualified nonprofit organizations, enabling them to deliver essential services such as emergency assistance, food distribution, healthcare support, and social programs for underserved populations. In addition to providing financial support, the organization developed its infrastructure for scalable impact. This included systems for evaluating partner organizations, tracking fund distribution, and enhancing transparency and accountability. These efforts positioned the organization as a growing platform for effective giving, committed to maximizing the impact of every dollar raised and distributed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: NotEnoughData
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 54.5%; rating input score 55; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 126.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 82.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 40 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Assets line sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.