World Connect Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562525151
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6464081257
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,475,765
Expenses
$2,298,794
Assets
$2,441,613
Liabilities
$154,517

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PAMELA NATHENSON (EXECUTIVE DI): $249,151 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE LACKOWSKI (CHIEF OPERAT): $196,887 total reported compensation
  • PATRICK HIGDON (GLOBAL DIREC): $156,640 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

World connect activates power inside communities by co-investing with them to advance development on their terms, supporting a virtuous cycle of development that drives effective and sustained progress from inside communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

World connect awarded 374,056 in grants in 2024 for 79 projects that promote health, protect the environment, increase education and economic opportunity, and access to community services with a focus on women and children. World connect works with strategic partners in the field who are well positioned to support genuine grassroots leadership and project development. World connect projects must be locally led and demonstrate the promise of promoting further community led development. Grants were provided to grantees located in malawi, rwanda, nigeria, ecuador, and kenya.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.6%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 40th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.9%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.8%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.6% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 26 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.