Kabale School Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331680238
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Westminster, CA, USA
Phone
7142246928
Rating
25
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$173,094
Expenses
$178,231
Assets
$5,225
Liabilities
$5,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THIERRY NGUYEN (PRESIDENT)
  • HELEN NINH (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • THIERRY NGUYEN (PRESIDENT)
  • HELEN NINH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TERRI THOA PHAM (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purposes of KABALE SCHOOL FUND are to provide assistance and scholarship to needy and deserving students and build schools in Kabale, Uganda

What it reported doing in 2025

NA

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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 13 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.