Vittana Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261153264
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Redmond, WA, USA
Phone
8005928916
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$658,005
Expenses
$1,323,117
Assets
$483,933
Liabilities
$430,399

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBIN WOLANER (CEO & PRESIDENT)
  • KATE COCHRAN (STRATEGIC ADVISOR TO CEO/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBIN WOLANER (CEO & PRESIDENT): $140,000 total reported compensation
  • KATE COCHRAN (STRATEGIC ADVISOR TO CEO/DIRECTOR): $60,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Vittana's mission is to graduate a generation of students beyond poverty through the power of education. In 2014, we worked in more than 15 countries with 26 partners.

What it reported doing in 2014

Through vittana's peer-to-peer student lending website, we engage a community of 6,000 active users that are interested in changing educational opportunities for those in need. Vittana lenders make loans to individual students who then repay them. In 2014, vittana faciliated loans worth $6,235,922.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: 25.9%; rating input score 26; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -101.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.89; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -28.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -39.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -51.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $799K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.