University of the Andes Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133082248
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122301077
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,854,115
Expenses
$2,675,000
Assets
$9,886,667
Liabilities
$2,506,130

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SANDRA DIAZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ALBERTO MEJIA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDRA DIAZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $214,773 total reported compensation
  • JO ANN ARIAS (SECRETARY AND TREASURER): $142,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The university of the andes foundation is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt organization (recognized by the u.s. Internal revenue service), which brings together alumni and friends of universidad de los andes in bogotá, colombia. We aim to create and build a community of alumni and friends in north america who are interested in supporting the programs and activities of the universidad de los andes in bogota, colombia, so that it may maintain its unique learning environment, achieve excellence in teaching and research, assist its students and faculty in their continued academic work in the u.s., and provide access to the university's programs and facilities to colombia's most able students who may lack financial means.

What it reported doing in 2025

Vamos pa'lante - in colombia, one out of every three university students drops out before graduation, mainly due to financial difficulties. Many young people are forced to abandon their dreams of earning a degree and building a better future simply because they cannot afford tuition or basic living expenses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.7; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.