Nobis Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471446270
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Coral Gables, FL, USA
Phone
3054828413
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$461,995
Expenses
$374,988
Assets
$154,311
Liabilities
$3,950

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ISIDRO ROMERO NOBOA (PRESIDENT;DIRECTOR)
  • ANTONELLA ROMERO (VICE PRESIDENT;DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ISIDRO ROMERO NOBOA (PRESIDENT;DIRECTOR): $60,000 total reported compensation
  • ANTONELLA ROMERO (VICE PRESIDENT;DIRECTOR): $40,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nobis foundation performs charitable and humanitarian acts in countries and regions with scarce economic resources, as well as in areas endangered by natural disasters and/or poverty. These areas include, but are not limited to, the united states, latin america, and the carribean. The organization also plans to carry out educational programs and assist with the funding of schools, technology, and learning materials which will allow disadvantaged children and teenagers to develop themselves into responsible and educated adults, as well as promote culture, arts and science among children and teenagers. Finally, the organization plans to organize and sponsor meetings, forums, and workshops relating to social responsibilty, community development and philanthropy. In order to further its charitable purposes, the organization plans to cooperate with other not-for-profits based in Florida and obtain donations from individuals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nobis foundation is involved in "educational volunteer program" aimed to promote humanitarian and social work in poor ecuadorian schools. In 2024, the program contributed in "project water" which helped build bathrooms in schools in ecuador.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 18.8%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.8% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $373K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.