Priority Africa Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872021707
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
4088214795
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,785
Expenses
$163,112
Assets
$349,483
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • YOEL HAILE (Co Director): $33,107 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL GEBRESLASSIE (Co Director): $32,991 total reported compensation
  • MEGDELAWIT KIDANE (EXCUTIVE DIRECTOR): $25,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Priority Africa Network builds intergenerational bridges within the African diaspora to advance Pan-Africanism ideals that enable an inclusive and equitable society for all people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Priority Africa Network PAN works to advance social justice and human rights by strengthening the voice and leadership of African and African Diaspora communities. Through education advocacy and community organizing PAN builds awareness of Africa-related issues promotes equitable U.S.Africa policies and fosters collaboration among organizations committed to justice and sustainable development in Africa and the global African community.PAN has been successful in building belonging and cultural visibility for Black immigrant communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.7%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $92.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.6%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -37.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.7% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $117K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.