House of Umoja Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231886698
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2154735893
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,141
- Expenses
- $150,842
- Assets
- $400,166
- Liabilities
- $1,068
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- FALAKA FATTAH (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DAVID DAVENPORT (DIRECTOR)
- ANGELA SHAKUR (DIRECTOR)
- FALAKA FATTAH (PRESIDENT)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Using the nucleus of family, culture, ariculture, individual & community empowerment, and peace, the house of umoja mission is to continue reducing violence evident among at-risk youth, cultivate the umoja intentional community and umoja youth peace corps while building a safe haven campus, the fattah peace institue.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided social services to children who are in need of help by proving instructions, life skills, ged preparation, african history and culture pre-vocational training, work experience and job training
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 20
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -966.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.65; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 44.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 20.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.