Optimal Greening Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873939276
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Richmond, TX, USA
Phone
8328121406
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Utilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,744
Expenses
$85,284
Assets
$14,112
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • OSENKERE IYAHEN (CHAIRPERSON)
  • ADEWOLE LONGE (SECRETARY)
  • OJE LONGE (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To restore health and dignity to Africans in marginalized communities through access to clean Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) services, anchored on environmental sustainability and community development.

What it reported doing in 2025

The WASH program consists of infrastructure development and capacity building for local community members. Project Sustainable Water for Future Transformation (SWIFT) was developed under the program. The project drilled two industrial boreholes and installed water treatment facilities and solar systems to power WASH facilities. The project delivered a combined capacity of 30,000 liters per day, serving over 9000 direct beneficiaries in Isiwu and Eginrin communities in Ikorodu, Nigeria. The project integrates governance strengthening and structured capacity building to ensure long-term sustainability and community ownership. Project SWIFT trained a total of 106 community members in governance, asset maintenance and financial management.

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 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -68.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 67.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 120% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.