The Nelson Mandela Institution for Knowledge Building and The
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 203048545
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 7342724977
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,129,351
- Expenses
- $4,150,570
- Assets
- $11,835,983
- Liabilities
- $647,155
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BONAVENTURE MBIDA-ESSAMA (CEO)
People named in this filing
- JEAN-LOUIS SARBIB (DIRECTOR)
- NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA (CHAIR)
- BONAVENTURE MBIDA-ESSAMA (CEO)
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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The nelson mandela institution for knowledge building and the advancement of science and technology in sub-saharan africa, inc. ("nmi"), a Delaware non-profit organization, was created to promote changes in technology and education in africa. Nmi was created as a response to the dearth of top quality science and engineering education in sub-saharan africa that has become all the more apparent in an era of a fast changing and globalizing world. Nmi represents a new way of doing things in the higher education sector in africa. It is based on a number of core principles, including a focus on academic excellence, independence from government, tight links with industry, strong corporate governance structures, and a focus on producing men and women with the entrepreneurial flair and compassionate spirit to help transform their local communities and improve the human condition across the african continent. It is also designed to innovatively draw on the significant african diaspora in academi
What it reported doing in 2018
Nmi was created as a response to the dearth of top quality science and engineering education in sub-saharan africa that has become all the more apparent in an era of a fast changing and globalizing world. Nmi represents a new way of doing things in the higher education sector in africa. It is based on a number of core principles, including a focus on academic excellence, independence from government, tight links with industry, strong corporate governance structures, and a focus on producing men and women with the entrepreneurial flair and compassionate spirit to help transform their local communities and improve the human condition across the african continent. It is also designed to innovatively draw on the significant african diaspora in academics in oecd countries and beyond.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 92.9%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.85; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $147K reported
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.