The Small Enterprise Education and Promotion Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133840611
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
2025341400
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,485,694
Expenses
$2,118,437
Assets
$1,027,683
Liabilities
$1,465,742

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEX SARDAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEX SARDAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $137,545 total reported compensation
  • MBAYANG DIOP (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $122,985 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The seep network's mission is to empower our members to be effective agents of change and to enhance their collective ability to accelerate learning and scale impact.

What it reported doing in 2020

Markets in crisis: seep aims to expand the scale and effectiveness of strategies that use the power of the market to support people, business and systems that are highly vulnerable to the shock-stress-shock cycle. Through the engagement of a large and diverse range of organizations in the humanitarian and economic development fields - practitioners, financial service providers, donors, governments, technology providers we work collectively to develop and promote improved standards of practice, foster collaboration, and create opportunities for learning and access to relevant tools and technical resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -42.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.43; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 58.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2015 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.