No Poor Among Us

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455509980
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8013591189
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$490,004
Expenses
$166,909
Assets
$831,251
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID HAMBLIN (PRESIDENT)
  • TODD HAMBLIN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID HAMBLIN (PRESIDENT)
  • CHARLOTTE HAMBLIN (TREASURER)
  • TODD HAMBLIN (VICE 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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Empower women and girls in mozambique through education

What it reported doing in 2017

In mozambique all children must supply their own uniforms to attend public school. Girls who do not attend public school, either marry ver or prostitute themselves for support. No poor among us provides uniforms to the girls, the uniforms are made in maputo mozambique by local women. Npau also provides high school girls with uniforms, books supplies, backpacks and school fees for the school year. Npau provides scholorships to qualified female university students

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. 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: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 46
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.5%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 11th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.9%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.98; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $130K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 35/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.