Zomi Innkuan USA Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264145898
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Tulsa, OK, USA
- Phone
- 9188074114
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $979,362
- Expenses
- $946,950
- Assets
- $584,739
- Liabilities
- $70,000
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
36 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PU LIAN CIN THAWNG (Secretary and Executive Director)
- PU DR HAU ZA CIN SUANTE (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- PU ANDREW PAU LIAN NUN (Genvai Director and Board Chairman): $6,300 total reported compensation
- PU LIAN CIN THAWNG (Secretary and Executive Director): $4,000 total reported compensation
- PI DIM MUAN KIM (Account Manager): $3,900 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To build unity solidarity and fellowship among the zomi communities to work together for the improvement and development in social welfare of the zomi communities to assist the zomi ethnic people living in the united states in their socialcultural assimilation and integration process into the american society to provide assistance and support in social educational and community development for the zomi ethnic people around the world.
What it reported doing in 2025
Domestic grants for scholarships english language learner ell programs and local community development. Includes zdf humanitarian aid to zomi communities in myanmar and india 96,842 and domestic scholarships and ell support 8,000.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 9
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.6%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.6% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 96 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $733K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 36 people listed
- Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.