Hias Economic Advancement Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 880984307
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Silver Spring, MD, USA
- Phone
- 3018447300
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Urban, Community Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,142,557
- Expenses
- $751,941
- Assets
- $1,678,791
- Liabilities
- $828,757
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PHILLIP BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- PHILLIP BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,672 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
"hias economic advancement fund, inc. Is an unconsolidated subsidiary of hias, inc. Eaf meets the financial needs of low-income individuals, including refugees, their families, and their communities by providing access to financial products and services that promote economic opportunity and financial well-being.
What it reported doing in 2024
Eaf assisted 205 entrepreneurs and disbursed 36 microenterprise loans in 2025, complemented by technical assistance delivered through partnerships with community organizations. Through these partnerships, borrowers receive business counseling, financial and credit education, and access to capital through eaf. Loan products are designed for low-income individuals, including refugees and immigrants, with little or no credit history, who are unable to access mainstream financial institutions. In 2024, eaf served entrepreneurs in 18 cities across five states, with loans averaging $10,852. Survey analysis shows strong outcomes: 86% of businesses remain active since receiving a loan, borrower households report income gains of more than $1,000 per month, and 99% would recommend eaf to others.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 46.2%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $30.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 34.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.23; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 42.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 49.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 46.2% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $528K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.