Voices of Tomorrow

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465211499
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Renton, WA, USA
Phone
2063700489
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development – Religious Leadership

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,783,070
Expenses
$8,986,779
Assets
$10,014,189
Liabilities
$6,478,994

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ZAMZAM MOHAMED (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • FAISAL ABDULAHI (BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ZAMZAM MOHAMED (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $182,739 total reported compensation
  • IFTIN HAGIMOHAMED (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $168,467 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide culturally responsive, child-focused programs that support the growth, learning, and well-being of children and families. To strengthen community-based systems by empowering providers to deliver equitable........

What it reported doing in 2024

Early Larning Programs: Operated two types of early learning programs, a center-based preschool and a home visiting program, serving more than 350 children and their families across King County. The programs provided high-quality, culturally responsive early childhood education, developmental screenings, and family support services. Both models emphasized inclusion, bilingual learning, and school readiness, ensuring equitable access for immigrant and refugee families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 35.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 32.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.8% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $763K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 32 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.