Myanmar Foundation for Analytic Educatio

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061622911
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Portola Valley, CA, USA
Phone
6502086997
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,270
Expenses
$82,474
Assets
$126,296
Liabilities
$101,494

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMB SCOT MARCIEL (President)

People named in this filing

  • ARKAR KYAW (Director)
  • CHARLIE HARCOURT (Executive Dir.)
  • PENNY STROUD (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To expand opportunities, especially related to pre collegiate programs, for Myanmar youth in education with an emphasis on critical thinking, civic participation, and understanding the diverse communities within Myanmar and in the broader world, with the objective of preparing students for attending colleges in the United States.

What it reported doing in 2025

Pre collegiate programs provided with the objective of preparing students for attending colleges in the united states

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.6%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 16

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: -95.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.6% of revenue deployed · 16.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • 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 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.