United States-ukraine Business Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521948142
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022160995
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,077,989
Expenses
$858,371
Assets
$904,950
Liabilities
$425,736

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • E MORGAN WILLIAMS (FORMER PRESIDENT)
  • DR IRINA PALIASHVILI (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • E MORGAN WILLIAMS (FORMER PRESIDENT): $152,292 total reported compensation
  • DR IRINA PALIASHVILI (President): $66,000 total reported compensation
  • GREGORY FISHMAN (SEC/TREASURY): $8,920 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The u.s.-ukraine business council was established in october 1995 to advance u.s. Companies' trade and investment interests in ukraine's significant emerging market, advocate for measures to improve conditions for bilateral trade and investment, and generally promote strong, friendly bilateral ties. To fulfill this mission, the council seeks to: assure that the u.s. Business viewpoint is known and given highest consideration in the formulation of u.s. Government policies towards ukraine; assure that the u.s. Business perspective, including the u.s. Business community's desire to contribute constructively to ukraine's vigorous market development, is understood within the ukrainian public and private sectors; make u.s. Business views known to the government and private sector of ukraine with respect to policies and legal, regulatory and other matters which bear significantly upon the willingness or ability of u.s. Companies to trade with or invest in ukraine; andfacilitate direct contacts

What it reported doing in 2024

Communications - the council provide routine communications to member keeping them abreast of economic and regulatory matters impacting commercial relationships and economic activity between the us and ukraine.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 39
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $690K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.