Live to Love Foundation USA Aka Live to Love International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263069538
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
3108807263
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,552,634
Expenses
$791,285
Assets
$1,088,976
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES POTTER (CHAIR)
  • AGATHE DUPART (BOARD MEMBER)
  • CHRISTOPHER MILLER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Live to love empowers communities to serve as guardians of the himalayas. Our projects build resiliency and are locally led, environmentally conscious, and inclusive. We focus on serving women and indigenous/marginalized communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing grants to other organizations that work with marginalized populations, women and girls, remote, underserved regions, and at-risk villages and tribes by providing access to education, mentorship, exchange programs, awareness raising, advocacy training, cultural preservation workshops, heritage education, women's health education, and access to healthcare. Also, working with local community groups and nurturing the next generation of leaders through the naropa fellowship.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 39.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $699K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.