Hmong American Mutual Assistance As

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411684196
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$459,500
Expenses
$384,903
Assets
$47,855
Liabilities
$99,263

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TANG SAY XIONG (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WA HOUA KHA (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TANG SAY XIONG (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NINA VANG (SECRETARY)
  • JOU XIONG (TREASURER)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote leadership in the hmong community; promote educational advancement for hmong youth and teens; encourage hmong refugees to be self sufficient and contributing members of their community; and promote and maintain hmong cultural heritage

What it reported doing in 2015

Hmong cultural instruments: teach 115 hmong youth for hmong traditional music instruments, dance, martial arts, and video camera to record history

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.07; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -45% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.8% of revenue deployed · 92.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $358K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.