Simplicity Resource Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834273463
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Evanston, IL, USA
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food, Agriculture, and Nutrition N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$145,000
Expenses
$145,000
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Huda Hilmi (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Deon Anderson (Exexutive Director)
  • Simone Morgan (Trustee)
  • Erlene Carter (Trustee)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Simplicity Resources Network Incorporated leads national and international development and humanitarian efforts to stop violence, reduce poverty, by empowering women, strengthen democratic governance, eliminate illiteracy, and help people progress beyond assistance.

What it reported doing in 2019

During the year we feed the hungry and distribute clothes, laptops, cell phones, and toys into many villages in Guyana. We also paid for Children ages 3-18th to go to school and after-school lessons. Out of the Children we help 6 just graduated, 3 found jobs, 3 are moving on to university, and 6 still in primary and after-school lessons.Our donation and resources were provided to the following villages in Guyana: Central Georgetown, Yarrowkaba linden highway, Timehri East Bank Demerara, Mocha Village, Vreedinghoop village, West coast Demerara, Maranath brethren, East Ruimveldt, Golden Grove, East Coast Demerara, Cotton Tree Village, West Coast Berbic.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.3%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.3% of revenue deployed · 56.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $82K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.