Human Necessity Foundation

Legal name: Human Necessity Foundation Worldwid

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474641690
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Valley Stream, NY, USA
Phone
(718) 606-2763, (347) 703-5339, (917)-855-7974
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$779,461
Expenses
$746,402
Assets
$24,244
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SHEIKH JAVED (BOARD MEMBER): $25,288 total reported compensation
  • NAVEEDA JAVED (BOARD MEMBER): $22,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Human Necessity Foundation’s mission is to provide clean drinking water through Solar Water Plants to people in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provided clean water through solar panel to multiple villages that is suffering through poverty and lack of water supply. The organization also provided food, clean water and medical aid to those who are suffering from poverty, and natural disasters. The organization also helped raise funds for mosques located in the united states. The organization provided local and global community serviceand, and provded education grants to those that are below poverty level.

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 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 48
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 11 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 9 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported · 4 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $718K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.