Tcp Global

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883268073
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Phone
3059625180
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$455,687
Expenses
$414,361
Assets
$54,201
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Helene Dudley (President)
  • Michelle Daniels (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Curt Commander (Director)
  • Chris Roesel (Director)
  • Glenn Blumhorst (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide affordable loans to impoverished entrepreneurs in marginalized communities in the developing world and create a permanent revenue stream for grassroots organizations working effectively to serve those communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

During 2025, TCP Global completed 66 grants to 17 grantees. The independent grantees worked with their network of lending sites (including 70 new sites opened in 2025) to make 10,669 affordable loans and added 3,279 new borrowers. As the borrowers repaid their loans, the lending sites were able to create new loans and new opportunities for the borrowers in the communities they serve. TCP GRANTS $386,000: NEW SITE CONTRIBUTIONS $147,513: LOAN REPAYMENTS $2,423,102: TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR LENDING $2,978,513. In summary, the mission of TCP Global is being fulfilled through the seeding of a vision that is cultivated and harvested by local organizations for the benefit of the entire community each organization serves.

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 100% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $620.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 93.7%; rating input score 94; 56th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $386K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.