International Refugee Assistance Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822167556
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
5167014636
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,230,045
Expenses
$31,210,283
Assets
$54,604,844
Liabilities
$11,307,382

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA HELLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • SHARIF ALY (PRESIDENT)
  • AMY TAYLOR DEPUTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARIF ALY (PRESIDENT): $422,448 total reported compensation
  • REBECCA HELLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $384,982 total reported compensation
  • AMY TAYLOR DEPUTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM): $336,092 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Irap is a global legal aid and advocacy organization working to create a world where refugees and all people seeking safety are empowered to claim their right to freedom of movement and a path to lasting refuge. Everyone should have a safe place to live and a safe way to get there.

What it reported doing in 2024

Communicationsirap continues to amplify the voices of displaced people through traditional media outlets and in the digital sphere. We involve our current and former clients in our media and advocacy work to ensure their voices are heard. In addition to media placement, we utilize social media outlets, including facebook, twitter, and instagram, our website, and mass email campaigns to communicate to supporters. Irap has a number of cross-departmental priority teams working on various issues in partnership with our communications team. Other programsin addition to irap's legal services and advocacy programs, we have several other programmatic areas that support and amplify the impact of our core work. These programs include organizational planning; evaluation & learning; digital resources, products, and engagement; global partnerships; legal knowledge and training; disability inclusion and accessibility; and pro bono. Organizational planning, evaluation, and learning ensure that irap's mission, vision, and programmatic priorities are aligned and enable us to project, track, and measure our impact. Legal knowledge, training, and pro bono allow us to engage meaningfully with legal practitioners around the world, supporting them as they assist refugees, and leveraging their resources to support irap clients. Digital products and resources leads our work to develop high quality, digital legal informational resources for displaced people globally. Our global partnerships program facilitates our collaboration with refugee-led and community-based organizations around the world to ensure our work centers the voices, input, and needs expressed by directly impacted communities and those with lived experiences. Irap's disability inclusion program expands our core programmatic work to be more inclusive of the differing experiences and needs of displaced people with disabilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -104.9%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.75; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $25.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $422K · 31 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $993K reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.