Grassroots Global Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463592889
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3036183703
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,155
Expenses
$368,937
Assets
$107,332
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Craig Nason (Associate Director): $46,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Grassroots Global Development Foundation is an international grant making foundation that provides financial and strategic support to locally led, community based organizations who are serving women and children impacted by poverty.

What it reported doing in 2014

GGDF provides grants to community based organizations in Mexico, Latin America, and the Caribbean serving women and children in poverty. Each grant is combined with specific strategic capacity building support in an area of need identified by the grantee organization. Focus areas include program development, financial resource development, financial management, strategic communications, human resources & admin, and leadership & management

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 55th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 6.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.1% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $296K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.