Multivate Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473076890
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159819999
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,300
Expenses
$8,695
Assets
$5,240
Liabilities
$3,694

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Cathy Pagsolingan (Director)
  • Robert A Sheffield (Treasurer)
  • Thomas W Kill (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The specific purpose of this Corporation is to organize, create, and support churches, schools, and nonprofit partnerships, primarily but not exclusively in the majority world, consistent with Biblical principles.

What it reported doing in 2016

1. Training Congolese church and business leaders in an intensive program of economic development through procuring grants to fund business proposals. Topics of training included how to be the kind of entity in which potential donors (or investors) want to invest, finding those donor investors, writing the grants for sustainable business proposals, and maintaining accountability in follow-up. 10 leaders were trained, about 500 Congolese adults and youth have since benefitted from the results of their training. 2. Creating the Give More Boutique model ? bringing together several global organizations that serve vulnerable children and women, encouraging business development of marketable products and providing a market through U.S. boutiques. 501(c)3 Organizations served in 2015 include Worldsong Training, Congo Voice, Malawi Children? s Mission, City of Refuge Ministries, EPA Made, and Freedom House. Boutiques were offered to organizations and buyers every 4 months.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -76.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -79.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.