Refuge Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464299583
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2257661443
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,419,465
Expenses
$216,352
Assets
$14,203,881
Liabilities
$20,442

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BILLIE W BRIAN (DIRECTOR & VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KRISTEN M LEWIS (DIRECTOR): $217,679 total reported compensation
  • MARYE E LORD (DIRECTOR): $164,964 total reported compensation
  • APRIL SHAFFER (DIRECTOR): $155,994 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The refuge foundation is a grant making organization that supports non-denominational christian retreat centers committed to the practice of silence, solitude and simplicity in a natural setting of god's creation where the participant commits themselves to practice these spiritual disciples during their stay, in order to experience the presence of christ, hear his voice and realign and re-energize their perspectives to his will for their lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Judson mission view is a property that is currently being developed. Once developed, judson mission view will be used for retreats that are committed to the practice of silence, solitude and simplicity in a natural setting of god's creation where the participant commits themselves to practice these spiritual disciples during their stay, in order to experience the presence of christ, hear his voice and realign and re-energize their perspectives to his will for their lives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 46
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 1.7%; rating input score 2
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 6th 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: 95.6%; rating input score 96; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 28.6%; rating input score 29; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 98.3%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 65.65; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 35.4% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 1.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $216K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $218K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 29/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.