Uganda Partners

Legal name: Uganda Christian University Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251857098
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sewickley, PA, USA
Phone
214-343-6422
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$853,606
Expenses
$791,992
Assets
$561,602
Liabilities
$32,452

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN DENNISON (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA BAEHR (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK BARTELS (EXEC DIR EX OFFICIO NON-VOTING): $89,742 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Uganda Christian University Partners is a non-profit charitable organization committed to raise public awareness about Uganda Christian University in the United States by seeking material and spiritual support for students through sponsorships; and by procuring funds for buildings and other needed projects.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization contributes funds for more than 100 scholarships (full and partial) and for academic programs in agricultural sciences; law; education; engineering, design and technology; jornalism, media and communications; public health, nursing and midwifery; social sciences; divinity and theology; medicine; dentistry; and business.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.4% of revenue deployed · 80.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $637K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.