Tloma Giving

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
845033654
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
North Logan, UT, USA
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Reported finances

Revenue
$99,092
Expenses
$39,682
Assets
$106,545

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Winona Perry (President)

People named in this filing

  • Winona Perry (President)
  • Jonna Holland (Secretary)
  • Kami McNeil Guglelmotto (Treasurer)

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

Foster primary and secondary education health nutrition and clean water to the Tloma Village Karatu District Tanzania

What it reported doing in 2025

Our nonprofit provides scholarships and individual sponsorships for 60 secondary students annually. This program aims to support students in need by covering their educational expenses including tuition books and supplies. By offering financial assistance we help these students access quality education and pursue their academic goals ultimately empowering them to achieve success in their studies and beyond.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.7%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99

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: 60%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -36.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.7% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 6 filed program accomplishments · $39K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.