Orphaned Starfish Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311782130
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
3479092137
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Residential Care & Adult Day Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,758,265
Expenses
$1,438,042
Assets
$3,269,246
Liabilities
$100,555

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew B Stein (Chairman, Pres): $193,000 total reported compensation
  • Karla Osorio (Dir - Operation): $94,039 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Orphaned Starfish Foundation creates lasting change in the lives of orphans throughout Latin America and the world by helping them develop vocational skills. We believe enabling them with these skills allows them to permanently overcome the cycle of poverty and abuse.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide orphans, victims of abuse, and at-risk youth with technology training through funding the construction and operation of vocational training facilities, including furnishings, equipment, teacher salaries, and job placement services. (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Trinidad, Ukraine, Uraguay, Venezuela)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $74.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 97.4%; rating input score 97; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.27; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.