West Africa Rice Development Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311602376
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Abidjan, Abidjan, IV
Phone
2722480910
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Agricultural Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,218,753
Expenses
$17,927,369
Assets
$41,690,637
Liabilities
$35,353,697

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MANNEH Baboucarr (Director General): $367,125 total reported compensation
  • OLATIFEDE Kolade Oladimeji (Director of Finance and Corporate Services): $239,768 total reported compensation
  • NDIOUR-BELLA Nafissatou (Director of Strategic Business Initatives): $227,956 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 deliver rice-based innovations and transformed rice-based agri-food systems that contribute to the transformation of food, land and water systems in the face of climate change.

What it reported doing in 2024

Policy, innovation systems and impact assessment program (PII) aims to generate knowledge that supports the development of rice technologies, policies, and institutions to improve livelihoods, nutrition and economic development, and seeks to increase the effectiveness of processes shaping the development and dissemination of sustainable technologies.

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 93% 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

STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.33; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $18M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $367K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.