Tanzania Education Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261245485
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Chestnut Hill, MA, USA
Phone
6172771999
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$475,523
Expenses
$371,477
Assets
$190,276
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROL HALL (PRESIDENT)
  • FRANK LEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CAROLINE KELLY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROLINE KELLY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Tanzania education corporation's mission is to partner with tanzanian-led schools to provide high-quality, locally driven education that empowers young people to lead, innovate and transform their communities. Tanzania education corp. Provides funds for student sponsorship, educational enrichment programs, and resources to strengthen learning environments at partner schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tec pays for enrichment programs at tumaini junior school and tumaini senior secondry school. These programs include pbl (project based learning) courses. Examples of pbl classes include computer programming, entrepreneurship, civics, the graphic novel, and bilogy lab-based classes. Other programs include college and career counseling, clubs, sports activities and nutritious food for the students. Finally, tec has built and maintained libraries as well as computer labs at both schools.

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 76% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $94.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.9%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.1% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $352K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.