Speak Up for the Poor

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270094780
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
8184451403
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$769,874
Expenses
$680,266
Assets
$283,803
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Troy Anderson (International Director and Board Member): $70,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Speak Up exists to transform the world on behalf of the poor. Our mission is to create a new reality for girls in poverty. We work toward this goal through educational programs support of safe homes and practical legal work.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our Girls Education Program began in 2012 with 20 girls. Today it supports over 2000 girls in more than 30 villages and slums in rural Bangladesh. These girls are among the poorest and most marginalized people in an already impoverished country. Our program provides daily tutoring books and school supplies and monthly education seminars. Bangladesh has the highest rate of child marriage in the world for girls under 15 and without intervention these girls are at risk of being married and dropping out of school. Our GEP seeks to break the cycle of poverty and child marriage by giving girls the means to stay in school. Working with families and communities we are building a new understanding of the potential for educated girls and are seeking to transform the way entire regions think about poor girls.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $584K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.