Omo Child Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275098874
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Encinitas, CA, USA
Phone
8587744628
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$101,259
Expenses
$234,352
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN R ROWE (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RICHARD OLAFSSON (DIRECTOR/CFO)
  • JOHN R ROWE (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL PETREE (DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To end the practice of infanticide and to provide humanitarian assistance in the omo river region of southwest ethiopia.

What it reported doing in 2017

Omo child seeks to provide a safe, nurturing home and quality education for rescued children. Our hope is that these children will become future leaders in their tribes and communities. We also raise awareness about the practice of mingi (the ritualistic killing of infants and children believed to be cursed) and work to see it eliminated.

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

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: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -131.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $171K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.