Us Fund for Daisy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205007275
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4065494687
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$304,333
Expenses
$302,652
Assets
$36,427
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GEORGE W KERSCHER (President)
  • PETER SHOBER (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • GEORGE W KERSCHER (President)
  • JANE DRAEGER (Treasurer)
  • JIM MARKS (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Developing and promoting international standards and technologies which enable equal access to information and knowledge by all people with print disabilities and which also benefit the wider comunity.

What it reported doing in 2024

The US Fund for DAISY supports the work of the DAISY Consortium to provide equal access to information for those with vision impairments or disabilities. - Help creators, distributors & service providers of access-enhanced publications be more effective- Help DAISY Consortium member organizations to work together to deliver inclusion- Help authors and mainstream publishers build inclusion into their publishing processes- Help publishing, reading technology and content authoring tool industries to enable a great reading experience for people reading with their eyes, ears or fingers- Influence legal, copyright and standards bodies to make an efficient global marketplace that includes developing countries- Help governments, civil society and disabled peoples organizations to achieve their inclusion aims- Help people with disabilities benefit from the improvements

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $280K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.