Village Voices International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814087196
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Dublin, OH, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$51,442
Expenses
$26,092
Assets
$58,930
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jacklyn Shaffer (President)
  • Douglas Hauth (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jacklyn Shaffer (President)
  • Douglas Hauth (Vice President)
  • Arthur Fitzgerald (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

Village Voices International empowers marginalized people in rural Kenyan villages by providing the technical and development resources necessary for them to implement and sustain community-led initiatives designed to promote self-sufficiency and build community resilience.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nine additional water distribution sites were installed in the village of Kailer - each with a concrete pad, 5,000 Liter water storage tank, sunshade and piping to a tap. This has allowed access to safe water within 15 minutes of all 1600 residents. Expenses include materials and stipend for labor; assistance for purchase of water treatment chemical and replacement part for the reverse osmosis system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.9%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 92.6%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 49.3%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.26; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.9% of revenue deployed · 92.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.