Global Refuge International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010833397
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$596,385
Expenses
$493,338
Assets
$29,718
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Timothy McNeely (Executive Director)
  • Shaunessy Kieng (Executive Director Health)

Highest reported compensation

  • Timothy McNeely (Executive Director): $50,000 total reported compensation
  • Shaunessy Kieng (Executive Director Health): $50,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

GRI provides an emergency lifeline to victims of disease war and disaster

What it reported doing in 2020

Thrift store and other miscellaneous expenses related to refugee services here and abroad that are not distributed by program but are program related.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.9%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • 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; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.9% of revenue deployed · 55.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $272K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.