International Bridges to Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311771358
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
7035917301
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,795,850
Expenses
$2,739,722
Assets
$1,038,960
Liabilities
$177,122

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN TSE (FOUNDER AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN TSE (FOUNDER AND CEO): $163,657 total reported compensation
  • SANJEEWA LIYANAGE (INT'L PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $161,353 total reported compensation
  • VEDAT SALFUR (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $148,353 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

In recognition of the fundamental principles of the universal declaration of human rights, international bridges to justice (ibj) is dedicated to protecting the basic legal rights of ordinary citizens in developing countries. Specifically, ibj works to guarantee all citizens the right to competent legal representation, the right to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment, and the right to a fair trial.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mena region: syria: in 2025, ibj deepened its work in syria by combining direct legal representation with long-term investment in a stronger, more rights-based defender community. Ibj provided legal representation to 379 detained or at-risk individuals, including 127 children, many of whom were awaiting trial without counsel in an under-resourced justice system. Juveniles were especially vulnerable, often detained in adult facilities and exposed to heightened risk of rights violations. To strengthen legal defense capacity, ibj trained 128 lawyers, including 62 women, through a training of trainers model and four multi-day criminal defense and trial advocacy workshops in azaz, idlib, deir ezzor, and aleppo. These trainings improved participants' skills in case analysis, evidence handling, procedural safeguards, and trial advocacy, while helping standardize rights-based defense practices across multiple jurisdictions. Ibj also supported 18 justicemakers fellows, including 8 women, equipping them to serve not only as legal aid providers, but also as mentors, trainers, and leaders of long-term reform within their communities. Institutional partnerships were reinforced through memoranda of understanding with bar associations in aleppo, idlib, deir ez-zor, latakia, tartous, daraa, rural damascus, and raqqa. To expand access to justice, ibj strengthened referrals through courts, bar associations, and community networks, helping connect vulnerable individuals to legal support. Despite security disruptions in northern syria, ibj continued delivering critical legal aid and capacity-building throughout the year, reinforcing the foundations of a more accessible and rights-based justice system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 44
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.