Omna Tigray

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862849940
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,685
Expenses
$63,668
Assets
$18,166

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mahlet Gebremedhin (President)

People named in this filing

  • Mahlet Gebremedhin (President)
  • Eyasu Berhe (Treasurer)
  • Jerusalem Girmay (Chief Communication Officer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Hdrina Board Led Organization Humanitarian Relief Program Provided financial and psychological support to over 225 survivors of GBV in Tigray; funded a feeding center and kitchen gardening project for 800 households in Sebacare4 IDP camp; supported livelihood training for displaced women including commercial sex workers and detained individuals. Total expenses: $46,568 IDP & Refugee Direct Support Program Distributed direct cash aid to displaced Tigrayans and refugees in Ethiopia and neighboring countries supporting housing food medication and resettlement coordination. Total expenses: $8,300

What it reported doing in 2024

In collaboration with local organizations in Tigray Ethiopia this program supported over 225 survivors of gender-based violence GBV internally displaced persons IDPs and economically marginalized women. Program efforts included providing psychological care financial support entrepreneurship training startup supplies food aid and construction of a feeding center in the Sebacare4 IDP camp. Over 800 households engaged in urban gardening and income-generating activities while 50 displaced commercial sex workers received reskilling and startup preparation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 86.2%; rating input score 86

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.9%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.6% of revenue deployed · 86.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $55K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.