Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020686783
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Olympia, WA, USA
Phone
3607543998
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$289,996
Expenses
$164,233
Assets
$223,664
Liabilities
$11,871

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cynthia Corrie (Board President)
  • Sayed Khan (Board Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Cynthia Corrie (Board President)
  • Sayed Khan (Board Vice President)
  • Sallie Shawl (Board Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Rachel Corrie Foundation fosters connections among people that build understanding and cooperation within local and global communities through grassroots efforts in pursuit of social economic and environmental justice. It emphasizes education for a just and lasting peace in Israel and Palestine drawing attention to and connections with similar injustice in other communities. The foundation is committed to the principles and practice of nonviolence and to their advancement as a means of effecting change.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants to U.S. charities providing humanitarian aid directly in Gaza: Through organization and local community fundraising efforts RCF was able to provide grants to the following U.S. based 501c3 organizations equipped to provide various forms of direct humanitarian assistance to children and families in Gaza: $750 to the Gaza Mental Health Foundation to support the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme which strives to improve the mental health of the Gaza community through clinical social research and training services with emphasis on the rights of women children and victims of violence; $6,664 to the Middle East Childrens Alliance MECA which works to protect the rights and improve the lives of children in the Middle East through aid empowerment and education and in Gaza has procured and delivered food and hygiene supplies partnered to run community kitchens to provide hot meals installed water purification units distributed clean drinking water initiated garbage collection projects and provided psychosocial support for displaced children with special emphasis on children with disabilities; $4321 to Palestine Childrens Relief Fund which provides free medical care to injured and ill children who lack access to care within their local health care systems and out of urgent moral necessity has expanded its mission beyond medical relief in Gaza to support emergency food delivery clean water access hygiene support nutritional assistance the establishment of field hospitals and kitchens etc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.5%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 43.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 45.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 39.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.5% of revenue deployed · 57.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $94K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.