New Haven CT Ukrainian American Humanitarian Aid Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
884361287
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Orange, CT, USA
Phone
2038484860
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,956
Expenses
$44,733
Assets
$25,670
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carl R Harvey (President)

People named in this filing

  • Carl R Harvey (President)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Collecting money medical equipment and medical supplies to be shipped to Ukraine that is distributed to medical and rehabilitation facilities throughout Ukraine including the frontlines.

What it reported doing in 2025

Fundraising through donations and the proceeds of the art show were used to purchase the refridgerator vehicle and the 6 charging stations.The grants were made to Father Roman Manulyak so that medicines and medical equipment could be purchased by him for delivery to hospitals and rehabilitation centers located primarily in the Lviv region of Ukraine and at the frontlines in the Eastern part of the country.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 20.1%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 45 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.