Imago Global Grassroots

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465554429
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023380451
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,293,428
Expenses
$2,875,779
Assets
$2,786,176
Liabilities
$311,216

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ISABEL GUERRERO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL WALTON (CO-FOUNDER): $175,113 total reported compensation
  • ISABEL GUERRERO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $160,333 total reported compensation
  • JOHANAN RIVERA FUENTES (COO): $122,045 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Imago global grassroots is committed to working with organizations to transform poverty into material well-being and dignity. We work around the world with existing organizations to enhance their strengths, build their capacity, and scale their impact in a way that respects their unique context, attributes and evolution.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our international programs supported initiatives across latin america, africa, and india to advance maternal and infant health, education, women's economic empowerment, and rural entrepreneurship. We supported five finalist organizations in colombia, kenya, guatemala, and uganda to strengthen their proposals for a $9 million maternal and infant health award by conducting diagnostics, leading workshops, and providing hands-on feedback throughout proposal development. In chile, we co-created and implemented a tool with sumar saberes and the ministry of education to assess the scalability of education initiatives. This tool has already evaluated 30 programs and is influencing how the sector approaches scale. In peru, we collaborated with the ministries of social inclusion and agriculture to strengthen rural entrepreneurship programs by building local government capacity, using adaptive evaluation to track progress, and supporting a more coherent support system for entrepreneurs. In india, we completed two large-scale evaluations assessing the impact of sewa bharat's women enterprise support system and the convergence of nrlm and mgnrega on women's economic empowerment and agency. We also established and operationalized 14 women-owned agro-processing enterprises, providing income-generating opportunities for over 500 women.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -122.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.