Pastoralist Child Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462346090
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Glen Ridge, NJ, USA
Phone
9739807860
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$299,989
Expenses
$381,449
Assets
$30,229
Liabilities
$102,000

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sayydah Garrett (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sayydah Garrett (President): $6,375 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pastoralist Child Foundation supports the health and well-being of the pastoralist (semi-nomadic) communities in Samburu and Maasai Mara, Kenya. Through advocacy, workshops, community dialogues, youth sports tournaments, and womens economic empowerment support, members of the community align to end outdated social norms and harmful human rights practices such as female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced early marriage. In addition, the organization emphasizes the importance of education, especially for girls who are not expected to attend school above the primary level. As a result of our efforts, the Samburu County government has incorporated FGM and child marriage in the school curriculum. Child marriage is no longer tolerated. In 2013, 1 in 10 children attended school. Currently, 80% of children attend school and the very first girls secondary school was constructed in Archers Post, Samburu County. Pastoralist Child Foundation provides full scholarships to 70 secondary and universi

What it reported doing in 2024

The Kenya advocacy program provides FGM, child marriage, and other sexual and reproductive health and rights workshops and community dialogues in practicing communities in Samburu and Maasai Mara.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $67.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.37; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $343K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 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: 2 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: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.