Lingos Global

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203100992
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
8327943279
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,030,117
Expenses
$1,997,911
Assets
$858,834
Liabilities
$827,129

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER PROULX (PRESIDENT/CEO/EXEC DIRECTO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER PROULX (PRESIDENT/CEO/EXEC DIRECTO): $211,958 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ensure that individuals and organizations within the international development, humanitarian and sustainability sectors have the right learning at the right place and the right time through: collaboration- maximizing the power of the sector doing things together; localization- striving to serve people in their own communities by providing appropriate tools, language and other capabilities; acceleration- seeking the multiplier effect through innovative models to extend the network, reach and impact of learning: private and public sector participation- forging partnerships with organizations and individuals to deliver best-practice solutions at a fraction of the cost.

What it reported doing in 2016

Lingos provides opportunities for training in project management techniques including a certification standard contextualized for the development sector; building initiatives to develop local capacity and to deliver training and coaching to local ngos in the application of project management methods. Lingos also has last mile learning initiatives aimed at front-line staff, providing on-line courses in a variety of management skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 73.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.