Namati Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452796201
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028881086
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,490,705
Expenses
$14,460,907
Assets
$91,263,787
Liabilities
$826,095

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VIVEK H MARU (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • VIVEK H MARU (PRESIDENT & CEO): $223,968 total reported compensation
  • INDIRA SARMA (COO): $203,276 total reported compensation
  • LEE BOYCE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $192,411 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. We strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives. Namati's work enables poor and underprivileged people to exercise their legal rights to protect and promote their social, cultural, and economic livelihoods. Our activities primarily consist of providing and training others to provide legal aid services. Namati intends to build a global network of practitioners to facilitate the sharing of tools and resources, foster dialogue, and ultimately create a movement for legal empowerment worldwide.

What it reported doing in 2025

Land, environment, and climate (lec)in kenya, sierra leone, and myanmar, namati and our partners work to strengthen a global movement of grassroots advocates advancing land, environmental, and climate justice. Paralegals support communities to negotiate projects on their land through organizing, collective bargaining, and enforcement of community rights.in 2025, in sierra leone, paralegals supported 220+ communities in sittia chiefdom to secure a landmark agreement protecting 79,000 hectares of mangroves and ensuring communities receive over 40% of revenue. In kenya, communities advanced negotiations with the northern rangelands trust carbon project, resulting in a transition toward community-led ownership. In myanmar, paralegals supported more than 64,000 people to protect community lands. Globally, the carbon justice campaign connected these local efforts to systemic change. We convened teams and grassroots justice network members to share lessons, support advocacy, and influence carbon market standards reaching over 1,000 organizations through peer learning and practical tools. Together, these efforts shaped national legislation and contributed to updates to verra's carbon standard, strengthening fpic, transparency, and community benefit sharing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.4%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $112.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 76.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.31; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.4% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $10.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $224K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $128K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.