Ukraine-Moldova American Enterprise Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133786524
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kyiv, IL, Ukraine
- Phone
- +380 44 490 5580
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $63,044,607
- Expenses
- $27,080,664
- Assets
- $285,854,402
- Liabilities
- $767,231
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAROSLAWA ZELINSKY JOHNSON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- LENNA KOSZARNY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JAROSLAWA ZELINSKY JOHNSON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $334,523 total reported compensation
- ANDRII SOROKHAN (VENTURE DIRECTOR, UVENTURES): $142,031 total reported compensation
- ANTON WASCHUK (INNOVATION, EDU. AND ENT. DIRECTOR): $126,640 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bringing U.S. capital, know-how and ingenuity to build competitive economies and just societies in Emerging Europe (Ukraine and Moldova). Program** aims to find effective solutions to support economic potential boost of Ukrainian regions through empowering communities and building partnerships. The Program is targeting small scale projects according to three main criteria, such as solving a problem and responding to the need of the community; building partnerships, and ensuring sustainability of results. Our Goal** – build sustainable partnerships to develop responsible, proactive communities at a local level Our Approach** – support transformative projects and agents of change (national solutions with a local impact).
What it reported doing in 2024
In september 2025, umaef received new funding of $49,852,000 from u.s. Government, as set forth in grant modification #29 issued january 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.6%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 57%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.56; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 50.6% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $26.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $335K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.