Leaders for Africa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810555870
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Bellevue, WA, USA
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,146
Expenses
$38,738
Assets
$2,691
Liabilities
$10,902

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • IVAN LUMALA (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • IVAN LUMALA (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID DRIFTMIER (TREASURER)
  • DR BILL POOLE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's purpose is to develop leaders in the developing world by providing them with educational opportunities in the united states, facilitating their successful return and eventual employment in their home countries, and finally working with some to create employment opportunities for themselves and others in their home countries.

What it reported doing in 2013

To provide higher education scholarship funds for students from developing countries in africa and overseas, particularly in the high technology fields but also in other fields that the board of directors may, at a given time, deem strategically important to the development of student's homeland.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95

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: -16.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -63% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.6% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -101.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $37K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • 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.

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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.