USA for Unfpa Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133996346
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6466499100
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,982,889
Expenses
$7,162,471
Assets
$2,793,297
Liabilities
$1,020,922

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANU SURENDRAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANU SURENDRAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $254,740 total reported compensation
  • JACOB GEERS (DIRECTOR OF INDIVIDUAL GIVING): $171,032 total reported compensation
  • HENRY ZAPATA (DIRECTOR OF PARTNERSHIPS): $139,542 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

USA for unfpa promotes the health, dignity, and rights of women and girls around the world by supporting the life-saving work of unfpa, the united nations reproductive health and rights agency, through education, advocacy and fundraising. Unfpa is the lead united nations entity for reproductive health and rights for all. Working in 155 countries, unfpa works to end the unmet need for family planning, to end maternal deaths, and to end violence and harmful practices against women and girls.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. Resource mobilization for unfpa's global work: USA for unfpa mobilizes financial support for unpfa, the united nations lead reproductive health and rights agency. Such funding provides reproductive health care for women and youth in more than 150 countries ensuring every woman's right to a healthy pregnancy and safe delivery no matter where they live or what their circumstances. Funds also help provide reliable access to voluntary family planning and modern contraceptives, train skilled birth attendants, increase access to emergency obstetric care, prevention and treatment of obstetric fistula, aid to women and young people in times of humanitarian crisis, and promote policies, investments and social support so that young people can lead healthy lives. Unfpa also focuses on improving the lives of adolescent girls by ending harmful practices such as female genital mutilation/cutting (fgm/c) and ending child marriage, as well as advocates for gender equality. 2. Public education and awareness-building: USA for unfpa educates and raises awareness about global reproductive health and rights, women's empowerment, and the critical role unfpa has in achieving these goals. Through our public education program, we disseminate information and stories through various communication channels; engage individuals through online outreach; social media, webinars and local education events. 3. Advocacy: USA for unfpa advocates for the health and dignity of women and girls everywhere. Through our advocacy program, we educate the general public, as well as mobilize supporters, grassroots networks, and work with coalitions to build strong support for global reproductive health and family planning needs, as well as women's maternal health care and supplies in emergency humanitarian crisis situations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 41st 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 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.6% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $255K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.