Moringa for Love

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
550822271
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Monterey Park, CA, USA
Phone
5626853206
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$156,441
Expenses
$143,651
Assets
$766,976
Liabilities
$1,627

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHOU PAI (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHOU PAI (President): $29,040 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to use Moringa to combat malnutrition poverty and deforestation in the world by purchasing seeds from small growers in underdeveloped countries and using them to make MFLs cosmetic products. Profit from sale of these products and donations are used to support MFLs Moringa, Education, and Charity projects around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarship Program: The organization provides supplies and scholarship to students with excellent academic performance. In 2024, we provided scholarship to one student in Africa, fourteen students in El Salvador, and six students in Haiti. Each student received a financial aid ranging from $150 to $1,500 a year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Revenue has grown recently. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 41
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.7%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 51.5%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.34; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.7% of revenue deployed · 51.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $74K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $29K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.