Rahmat E Alam Foundation

Legal name: Rahmat - E -Alam Foundation Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475124782
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
(773) 764-8274
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Islam
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$570,035
Expenses
$322,473
Assets
$4,121,675
Liabilities
$633,407

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ATEEQUE MOHAMMED (DIRECTOR)
  • MUKARRAM MOHAMMED (DIRECTOR)
  • YUNUS MOHAMMED (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The aims and purposes of rafw shall be to serve the northwest muslim community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community services: our center offers various community services suchas family counseling, weekly lectures on religious topics that familieslisten to online either through our youtube channel or mixlr service.we participate in a larger food distribution program and other charitycommunity services: our center offers various community services such{{f: s}}as family counseling, weekly lectures on religious topics that families{{f: s}}listen to online either through our youtube channel or mixlr service.{{f: s}}we participate in a larger food distribution program and other charity{{f: s}}events.events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.78; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported · 0 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $322K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.