Sudan Relief Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522148976
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Forth Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8884880348
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,559,785
Expenses
$8,481,151
Assets
$5,861,297
Liabilities
$183,004

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW SMITH (VP OF FUNDRA): $177,432 total reported compensation
  • NEIL CORKERY (DIRECTOR/PRE): $168,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the sudan relief fund inc. Is to assist in capacity building; the provision of food, clothing, shelter, education and medical attention; and to proclaim the gospel of christ to the people of south sudan.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, the sudan relief fund provided funds to various aid organizations operating in south sudan and various dioceses in the country. The purpose of these grants is to provide necessities like food and clothing, funding hospitals and orphanages, and universities and schools, in line with their mission. They continue to advocate for the people of south sudan by raising awareness of their situation through mailings, videos, and public events in the u.s.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 69% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 11.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 85.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $681K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.