Kasimu Education Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010864883
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- West Menlo Park, CA, USA
- Rating
- 56
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $77,307
- Expenses
- $78,376
- Assets
- $339
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kevin M Burns Sr (President)
- Deborah S Baker (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Kevin M Burns Sr (President)
- Deborah S Baker (Vice President)
- Kevin M Burns Jr (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Kasimu Education Fund KEF is a non-profit organization established to support the students and operations of the Kasimu School in Manyesa Village Malawi Africa; to improve educational opportunities and to maximize the students spiritual social and physical development. It is also KEFs intent that the local communities benefit and improve over time as a result of improved educational opportunities. KEF believes that education holds the key to breaking the cycles of poverty disease and hunger and has focused its efforts on making a direct impact on the prosperity of the impoverished Manyesa area.
What it reported doing in 2025
Funded scholarships for college students. Many of these students have graduated with either a 3-year diploma or a 4-year diploma. Students must fill out an KEF online Application for Tuition Assistance Form to be eligible for a KEF Scholarship.
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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 29
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 29.1%; rating input score 29
- Program expense ratio: 28.7%; rating input score 29
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 29.1% of revenue deployed · 28.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 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 29/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.