Nutrifund International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831924834
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3146515322
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nutrition

Reported finances

Revenue
$243,683
Expenses
$236,520
Assets
$117,142
Liabilities
$637

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patrick Mulligan (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Patrick Mulligan (Executive Director): $49,375 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To contribute to the recovery and prevention of malnourished children in Honduras by delivering high-quality nutritional care, health education, and community engagement that empowers families and strengthens local health systems.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community health program providing prenatal and postnatal services to women and families in rural Honduras, including health education, prenatal vitamins, physician visits, ultrasounds, and community health meetings. During the year, the program served approximately 550 women and also provided agricultural training and capacity building support to 108 smallholder farmers to strengthen household food security and nutrition.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 2.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.2% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.