Nomi Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800290896
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
6468670608
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sexual Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,202,505
Expenses
$5,290,099
Assets
$4,375,890
Liabilities
$592,366

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIANA MAO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CO-FOUNDER, PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA MAO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CO-FOUNDER, PRESIDENT): $175,583 total reported compensation
  • SUPEI LIU (VP OF INNOVATION & EXPANSION, CO-FOUNDER): $145,494 total reported compensation
  • JESSICA PHAM (VP OF GLOBAL OPERATIONS): $121,606 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nomi network's mission is to end human trafficking by creating pathways to safe employment, empowering women and girls to break cycles of slavery in their families and communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nomi network trains and develops women and girls affected by human trafficking and creates pathways to safe employment. We provide workforce development and sector-specific skills training, along with job placement and retention services. We build the capacity of local organizations and social enterprises to create market opportunities for at risk women and girls. We believe that by economically empowering women, we equip women to break cycles of slavery in their families and communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: -1.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.