Ka Joog Nonprofit Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392073475
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6122553524
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,454,173
Expenses
$1,139,439
Assets
$518,800
Liabilities
$56,247

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MOHAMED FARAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MOHAMED FARAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $50,693 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to create a better world by providing community-based, culturally specific programs and services to youth and their families through education, the arts, and economic development.

What it reported doing in 2020

Takeoff program: 4-h steam club including afterschool program- 515 students were engaged throughout our locations, 58% girls, 42% boys, of which 420 in the twin cities area including the 7-county metro & 95 in great Minnesota- an average of 0.66 gpa was improved on students who took part of this program- 97 high school seniors graduated this year who were part of the program- student public speaking was improved- increased participation in positive social activities- all seniors of the program have graduated and went to 2 or 4-year college/university- 21 educational trips were taken in the twin cities to places such as it colleges/universities, science museum, somali museum and other places.- students presented at the Minnesota state fair and the county fairs and won their competition within the 4-h clubs- average of 73% are pursuing a career in stem- average of 80% of parents/guardians participated in the program

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $303.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.6%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.9% of revenue deployed · 91.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $51K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.