Pro Bolivian Committee
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 541578683
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Arlington, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7034997658
- Rating
- 27
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Cultural, Ethnic Awareness
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $272,915
- Expenses
- $238,567
- Assets
- $72,064
- Liabilities
- $72,064
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
People named in this filing
- DOUGLAS REQUE (Security Director)
- JULIA GARCIA (VIP DIRECTOR)
- EDITH VEGA (HEALTH 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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promote the integratio and development of the bolivian community, to estimulate an awareness of their identity by promoting difussion of bolivia's cultural values, to promote cultural & social activities
What it reported doing in 2023
Cultural activities and presentations to preserve the heritage and help other communities by giving donations
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The strongest available result is that the organization raises money at a relatively low cost. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 37
- Transparency & Controls: 34
- Accountability: 0
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.6%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 35%; rating input score 35
- Fundraising efficiency: $34.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 0th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: Limited
- Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.6%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 30.6% of revenue deployed · 35% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $40K reported
- Consistency: 18 of 22 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2023
- 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: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesManagement column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.