TASH, Inc.

Legal name: Tash Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200396106
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Nov 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
(412) 219-9099
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$838,771
Expenses
$653,955
Assets
$5,599,791
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETE NOLL EXIT 1124 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CHARLEY GATES (PRESIDENT)
  • CHARLIE BAKER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PETE NOLL EXIT 1124 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,379 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 focus of TASH, Inc is Oaxaca, Mexico. Its mission is to serve the poor, especially those who need healthcare, as well as to help children who need a safe environment to grow and mature.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tash, inc. Advances its charitable mission by supporting access to healthcare and strengthening community-based organizations serving vulnerable populations in oaxaca, mexico - one of the country's most economically disadvantaged regions with limited access to basic health services and infrastructure. During the year, tash continued its longstanding commitment to the region. Program achievements include facilitating access to medical care for more than 201,000 patients through supported health initiatives and partnerships. Continued on schedule oin addition to direct healthcare impact, tash has provided financial support to approximately 30 nonprofit partner organizations working across both urban and rural communities. These partners deliver a range of services, including medical care, youth development programs, educational services, nutrition and workforce training, and support for at-risk populations such as children, single mothers, and rural families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.5%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.56; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $517K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.