International Deaf Education Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770091952
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Billings, MT, USA
Phone
4065340838
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$834,234
Expenses
$723,523
Assets
$696,480
Liabilities
$11,978

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Amy Lee (Executive Director / Director)
  • James Movius (President Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Amy Lee (Executive Director / Director): $73,333 total reported compensation
  • James Movius (President Director): $27,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

IDEA envisions a world where the deaf in the Philippines and elsewhere enjoy social and economic equality, exchanging isolation for community, servitude for self-reliance. Our mission is to foster self-reliance by providing academic, vocational, physical, spiritual, and economic opportunities for deaf children, adults, and families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Vocational Training / Shop, Spiritual Outreach, Misc. Program Services - IDEA trains its students in vocational skills they can use to support themselves and their families. Training includes courses in baking, cooking, furniture making, fly tying, mechanical, construction, sewing, pottery, computer graphics, electrical, electronics, plumbing, hair cutting, soap and detergent production, paper making, paving block production.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 0th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 13.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $527K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 25 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.