Seed Effect
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460639137
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8885053292
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Development
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,291,628
- Expenses
- $2,270,566
- Assets
- $2,295,980
- Liabilities
- $26,207
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DI): $125,301 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seed Effect is bringing Christ-centered economic empowerment to the hard places—planting the seeds that overcome poverty by providing access to economic empowerment, education, and spiritual discipleship in Uganda and South Sudan’s most marginalized communities. Unfortunately, over 80% of refugee crises last 10 years or more. While aid and emergency support are needed at first, in the long term, these solutions are unsustainable, creating dependency, and trapping families in a perpetual cycle of poverty. God is using you to transform lives through our holistic economic development strategy. Together, through our Christ-centered, savings-led microfinance program, we are empowering refugees and those living in material poverty to provide for their families with dignity.
What it reported doing in 2024
In july 2024 to june 2025, seed effect provided funding that enabled seed effect uganda, an independent organization in uganda, to launch savings and loan groups serving individuals. This christ-centered, savings-led microfinance program empowered these individuals to build christian community, study god's word, have a safe place to save, and access small loans to support income generation. 100% of these group members heard the gospel and had access to ongoing discipleship through weekly meetings and in partnership with the local church.
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 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.8%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th 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: 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 31%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 48.8% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.