Village Help for South Sudan Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 208692990
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Cambridge, MA, USA
- Phone
- 7819293925
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $37,306
- Expenses
- $62,388
- Assets
- $13,536
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Franco Majok (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Franco Majok (Executive Director)
- Ronald Moulton (Director)
- Lisa Deeley Smith (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to support and enable groups in remote villages of South Sudan to do their own development work. We do this by partnering with members of the diaspora to lead projects that assist their villages to assess needs and priorities, develop a plan to address the needs, and then complete implementation projects to meet the objectives of the plan. To date, our work has focused on the general areas of education, health care, small-scale agriculture, renewable energy, clean water and sanitation.
What it reported doing in 2025
Food / nutrition support
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 100
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -67.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -14.5% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.