Intercultural Development Research Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741804539
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2104781020
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Interdisciplinary Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,810,076
Expenses
$4,811,861
Assets
$19,492,736
Liabilities
$63,587

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CELINA MORENO JD (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • DR MARIA ROBLEDO MONTECEL (PRESIDENT EMERITA)

Highest reported compensation

  • CELINA MORENO JD (PRESIDENT & CEO): $363,977 total reported compensation
  • MORGAN CRAVEN JD (NAT DIR POLICY, ADVOCACY,COMM ENGAGE): $201,471 total reported compensation
  • MS PAIGE DUGGINS JD (CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST): $171,861 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule oidra is an independent, non-profit organization that is dedicated to strengthening public schools to work for all students. Founded on principles of ensuring equality of educational opportunity for every student, idra works with others to create self-renewing schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dsec- the defense stem education consortium (dsec) named the alamo stem ecosystem (ase) as one of four stem education hubs in the united states. Idra co-leads san antonio's ase, which brings together educators, community leaders and industry partners to expand opportunities for k-16 students. Through this partnership, the alamo stem hub will provide and scale up meaningful stem activities for underperforming students across san antonio and provide students and educators with exposure to educational and workforce development opportunities as well as awareness about career opportunities in stem fields.nextgen- u.s. Department of agriculture (usda) nextgen project idra was awarded a grant by the usda over five years to serve as the meta-evaluator for the national institute of food and agriculture's (nifa) "from learning to leading: cultivating the next generation of diverse food and agriculture professionals (nextgen). The nextgen program's focus on investment in nutrition science and higher education supports efforts to build and sustain the next generation of food, agriculture, natural resources, and human sciences workforce by providing student scholarship support, meaningful paid internships, fellowships, and job opportunity matching.amb- this amb grant, funded by the methodist healthcare ministries, implements the idra digital ambassadors program in the rio grande valley (rgv). The program is a community-based program that aims to empower rgv communities through youth-led technology training. The program also seeks to bridge the digital divide by transforming students into leaders and technology trainers for their local communities. Idra's innovative program is structured in three pivotal phases: research of community technology training needs, mastery of those skills, and community training. Initially, participating students will engage in comprehensive participatory action research to identify the most pressing technology needs within their community.txp- this grant, funded by the valley baptist legacy foundation, implements the idra youth tech experts and digital ambassadors programs in the rio grande valley. Techexperts is a school-based, comprehensive student-led it help desk program designed to prepare students for the demands of the modern information technology (it) landscape. The program engages "at-risk" students as campus leaders, builds their stem identity, and increases the probability they will complete the stem endorsement in high school. The program seeks to improve the low participation rates of students in it fields.sb17- this grant, funded by the greater Texas foundation, seeks to conduct actionable research on the impact on college-going students of Texas sb17 and the recent supreme court decision rejecting affirmative action in higher education. The 2023 legislature passed senate bill 17, and the united states supreme court made it more difficult for colleges to consider race in admission. Idra seeks to explore the impact of those laws on high school students' access to college and the opportunities for college admissions, financial aid, and student support in Texas higher education institutions. Specifically, idra proposes to research how these new policies impact high school student perceptions of college access and quality in Texas, including the impact in their decision to apply and attend college in Texas. Student success programs for historically underperforming students and admission and financial aid opportunities for those students.gcej- this grant, funded by the amalgamated foundation, supports the work of the Georgia coalition for education justice (gcej) which is led by idra. The goal is to broaden and make more authentic the education policymaking landscape by centering the voices of those mostly directly impacted by policy. Gcej engages and supports students, parents, educators, and community members to advocate policies that secure a high-quality public education for every student in georg

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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; 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: 17.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.05; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.1% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $364K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $220K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.