Humanitarian Services for Children of Vietnam

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412017760
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jordan, MN, USA
Phone
6122454185
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$405,985
Expenses
$401,978
Assets
$866,820
Liabilities
$27,314

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Annetta DeVet (Executive Director)
  • Maria Dumbaugh (President/Co-Secretary)
  • Roxane Svoboda (Vice President/Treasurer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Annetta DeVet (Executive Director): $33,902 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

HSCV provides Vietnams most vulnerable groups with the opportunities, tools, and resources to build a better future.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, HSCV provided critical support to disadvantaged children in Northern Vietnam who were at risk of dropping out of school. This support included assistance with educational expenses such as school fees and supplies. A total of 206 students received scholarships for pre- and post-high school education, while 36 children were equipped with backpacks containing essential school supplies. Additionally, 11 children received nutritional support, and 22 were provided with school lunches to ensure they could attend and focus in class. Beyond financial assistance, HSCV supported the holistic development of girls through soft skill training, emotional support, and educational guidance. A total of 149 girls participated in 42 training sessions focused on personal development and empowerment. Furthermore, 6 girls received direct support for schooling costs, and 5 families received financial assistance to help keep their daughters in school and engaged in training activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.5%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 72.3%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.1%; rating input score 74; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.16; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.5% of revenue deployed · 72.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $290K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.