The Kumari Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274018549
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Eugene, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5413422363
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $72,892
- Expenses
- $69,926
- Assets
- $79,428
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KEN BEESON (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KEN BEESON (PRESIDENT)
- CAROL YAHNER (TREASURER)
- NANCY WOOLFSON (VICE PRESIDE)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To empower orphans and children living in poverty and their families and the communities where they live, escpecially in nepal and especially the girls, by providing educational support, job skills and humanitarian aid, including medical assistance, food and shelter. To providfe assistance to orphanages and other institutions involved with helping orphans and children living in poverty, especially in nepal.
What it reported doing in 2025
Oversee operation of a children's safe house in nepal and provide support services for children including health care, school fees, counseling, turoring, and other.
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 64% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.6%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 97
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.1%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.6% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.