Suu Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462363360
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eureka, CA, USA
Phone
7072980471
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$658,569
Expenses
$735,788
Assets
$125,077
Liabilities
$8,054

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL MARETT-CROSBY (President & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • MARGOT PRIMAT (Director)
  • MICHELLE YEOH (Director)
  • JEAN TODT (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote health and education in Myanmar

What it reported doing in 2024

A meeting of Myanmar partners and others to identify ways of supporting humanitarian and democratic development in the context of the coup. A meeting of Myanmar partners and others to identify ways of supporting humanitarian and democratic development in the context of the coup. The provision of humanitarian relief and food assistance for refugees, with a specific focus on the needs of women and children. Support for human rights investigations and reporting to international bodies to enable transparency and to support justice for the victims of the coup.

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 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 46
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: -11.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $622K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.