International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA)
Legal name: International Centre for Biosaline Agriculture
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 981337190
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dubai, AE
- Phone
- +971 4 304 63 00
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Agricultural Development
- Affiliation
- Islam
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,127,823
- Expenses
- $10,263,977
- Assets
- $32,309,985
- Liabilities
- $9,747,712
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- TARIFA AL ZAABI (DIRECTOR GENERAL): $578,305 total reported compensation
- CHARBEL TARRAF (CHIEF OPERATIONS AND DEVEL): $290,213 total reported compensation
- LUIS AUGUSTO BECERRA (CHIEF SCIENTIST): $288,310 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
ICBA’s mission of advancing Agriculture for Tomorrow, centered on preventing, managing, and recovering from salinity.
What it reported doing in 2024
Sustainable natural resource management
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.7%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 69.2%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $27.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7.8%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.15; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 66.7% of revenue deployed · 69.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $578K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.