La Beca Womens Scholarship Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542164948
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7039263410
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$143,729
Expenses
$143,352
Assets
$70,784
Liabilities
$1,230

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Margaret Millar (President)
  • Kelly Jeffers (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Kris Amundson (Director)
  • Joanne Newton (Director)
  • Carmen Tobar (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Labeca womens scholarship foundation provides educational opportunities for low income women and girls in central america, south america & the caribbean.founded in 2005 the foundation currently supports over 25 scholars. See schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2024

LaBECA gives support through nonprofit organizations, educational institutions and direct tuition grants to individuals and their schools. The funds provide for low-income women & girls who are pursuing educational objectives. In some cases, funds were provide for computers and other equipment required to complete coursework. In 2024, students in university studied a broad array of subjects, including: dentistry, tourism, nutrition, education, engineering and finance. In 2024, three scholars completed high school and then continued to university. Five scholars graduated from university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 27
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $78.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.3% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $137K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.