Oliveseed Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821693564
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6509068548
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$261,163
Expenses
$309,677
Assets
$32,671
Liabilities
$16,805

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA MACKRAZ (FOUNDER & EXECUTIVE DIRECT): $6,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to build a positive and sustainable future in underserved communities through educational enrichment for youth, meaningful livelihoods for women, and clean water to drink. We focus on the indigenous amazigh and maasai communities of morocco and kenya.

What it reported doing in 2024

Literacy & educational enrichment: educational enrichment for underserved youth is our central pillar. In kenya, we develop high-quality libraries and science labs for schools in greatest need. We developed our 6th school library in the maasai mara in 2024 and expanded our scholarship program to include more students who would not otherwise be able to attend school. Over 6000 students each year in kenya directly benefit from these projects. In morocco in 2024, we held a nationwide short story competition for rural teens, with published books. As an extension of this successful program, we also held an essay competition on "challenges facing the next generation" for youth in both morocco and kenya, boosting literacy, critical thinking, and young leadership. In both countries, the teens presented their findings to a national audience of educators.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $47.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $285K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.