World Federation of Free Latvians

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521037082
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rockville, MD, USA
Phone
3013407646
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$266,852
Expenses
$270,384
Assets
$239,425
Liabilities
$5,465

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Blumberg (President)
  • Marite Klavina (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Raits Eglitis (Secretary General): $38,256 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 unite Latvians in continuing to strengthen Latvias independence and promote Latvias development in democratic, cultural and economic spheres; to promote active, organised, influential and vital Latvian communities overseas; and to promote the unity of Latvians worldwide.

What it reported doing in 2024

Strengthening democracy and economic processes in Latvia. Regular coordination with NGO and governmental agencies in Latvia on current issues, particularly on Latvians outside Latvia. Collection and dissemination of information regarding Latvias history and assisting integration into international institutions. Extensive efforts to build upon contacts developed at 2013 World Latvian Economics and Innovations forum led to a major forum in 2015 aimed at promoting Latvian diaspora engagement in Latvias development. Since then the forum has become an annual event, and has been held in Melbourne, Australia in 2016, in Chicago, United States in 2017, in Valmiera, Latvia in 2018 and in 2019, and since 2020 annually in Riga, Latvia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -1.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 61.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $166K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.