Heifer International Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710699939
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Little Rock, AR, USA
Phone
5019074900
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,249,830
Expenses
$9,413,624
Assets
$226,175,769
Liabilities
$21,872,482

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM DEMPSEY (PRESIDENT AND CEO (STARTING 1/25))
  • AMY DIERINGER (VICE PRESIDENT OF PEOPLE & CULTURE)
  • ARDYTH NEILL (FORMER PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ARDYTH NEILL (FORMER PRESIDENT): $252,246 total reported compensation
  • DEBBIE MCCULLOUGH (VP PLANNED GIVING): $224,594 total reported compensation
  • KATHERINE ST AMOUR (VP OF INVEST & FINANCE, TREASURER): $192,329 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To raise and oversee financial assets to support the work of heifer project international.

What it reported doing in 2024

Heifer international foundation's (foundation) mission is to raise and oversee financial assets to support the mission of heifer project international (hpi), an unrelated 501(c)(3) public charity. Hpi's mission includes supporting domestic and overseas communities to end world hunger and poverty and to care for the earth. The foundation supports hpi's mission primarily through grantmaking. During the year-ended june 30, 2025, the foundation made grants to hpi of $4,531,771 and to hpi's controlled foreign organizations of $637,760.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.5%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 23.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.03; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.5% of revenue deployed · 57.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $252K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $284K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.