Ircs Center for Economic Opportunity Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453686069
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8886121002
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,801,266
Expenses
$6,632,079
Assets
$27,853,053
Liabilities
$16,062,361

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Johannes Van de Weerd (Board President)
  • Ellen Beattie (Board President Interim ED)
  • Kasra Movahedi (Executive Director)
  • Ariana Miller (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Johannes Van de Weerd (Board President): $375,887 total reported compensation
  • Ellen Beattie (Board President Interim ED): $285,203 total reported compensation
  • Kasra Movahedi (Executive Director): $172,122 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To help create a more fair financial system through which people realize their potential and communities prosper.

What it reported doing in 2024

IRCs Center for Economic Opportunity (IRC-CEO) advances its exempt purpose by expanding responsible access to credit for low- and very-low-income refugees, immigrants, and other individuals and households with limited access to conventional financing. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2025, IRC-CEO provided responsible consumer and small business loans in collaboration with community-based partners that also offered credit education, technical assistance, and related financial capability and asset-building support. During FY2025, IRC-CEO deployed approximately $7.7 million in lending capital and maintained 3,681 outstanding loans as of September 30, 2025. IRC-CEOs integrated lending and education model helped borrowers establish or improve credit, address essential household and business needs, and pursue longer-term financial stability. (continuation in Schedule O, General Explanation)

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 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 9th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.2; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $376K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $121K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.