Last Mile4d

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471516033
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
4126383816
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$192,701
Expenses
$117,634
Assets
$167,433

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MAHNAZ M HARRISON (DIRECTOR & C)
  • JAMES F WARREN ESQ (DIRECTOR & S)
  • ROBERT FUNDERLICH CPA (DIRECTOR & T)

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

Last mile4d is a non-profit based in Washington, dc that designs and implements education and training programs with a focus on the health and safety of women and girls living in the most remote and underserved areas of the developing world known as the "last mile" communities. The name refers to communities disconnected from health and other infrastructure such as roads, running water or hospitals. Lm4d develops health and safety solutions for women and girls living in oppressive environments in the last mile. We tailor our approach to the needs of each community. The philosophy that guides and motivates us is that access to health and safety is a fundamental human right regardless of where a woman or girl lives. Our mission is to ensure women and girls have access to information about their health, safety, and freedom from gender-based violence, including female genital mutilation (fgm).

What it reported doing in 2025

This grant is designed to prevent female genital mutilation (fgm). The project uses our data systems and community protocols to collect evidence- based data. This data inform community outreach and advocacy programs that change attitudes and behaviors for girls and their families, but also the broader communities which unwittingly, through inaction, have tacitly provided consent for fgm. The project enrolls 2,069 girls and their families in a year-long program using voicepack4development (v4d) in two counties of migori and west pokot in kenya. The project involves the following stages: a. Train field staff on the use of v4d. The v4d has proven to be a positive disruptor, merging technology, data collection and data analysis to inform community-centered programs. Mobile 4d will ensure uninterrupted access to data and educational modules for communities we select. This, combined with consistent outreach, monitoring and evaluation will work to eliminate fgm. B. Roll out the v4d and enroll the girls to collect real-time data, allowing for in-time intervention by our field staff, supported by police and children services. C. Provide shelter for girls during the cutting season when fgm risk is the highest but only as the last resort. We provide 34 sanctuary day camps, a transformational action that disrupted the cutting season and kept girls safe. D. Use the 10 educational modules in the weekly school sessions to infrom the students about their rights, myths, and facts about fgm, the physical and psychological harms of fgm, national and international laws prohibiting fgm and the role of government in keeping girls safe. E. Provide monthly educational modules about the harms of fgm. From the outset, the program will engage community influencers, tribal chiefs, religious leaders, local government, and all the stakeholders. The objective is to obtain agreement and support that we believe in essential for program success. F. Share technology driven data collection results in mobilizing community efforts. As part of this effort, we will share real-time data on the enrolled girls to inform the community at stakeholders' community forums in the region. Data collected will document the effectiveness to eradicate fgm. G. If past sucess is any predictor of future success, the compelling evidence will mobilize the community behind our efforts. We will continue collecting, analyzing, and communicating the fgm data findings with local authorities for actions and interventions, as evidence that the practice continues, despite its illegality.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.5%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.5% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.