Refugee Assistance Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813884616
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6197939019
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$484,120
Expenses
$378,489
Assets
$17,077
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Ruth Abraham (Program Mgr): $24,000 total reported compensation
  • Selamawit Tessman (Program Mgr): $19,200 total reported compensation
  • Meaza Serfu (Project): $19,200 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 refugees rebuild safe sustainable lives in San Diego through a supportive network of people services and communities

What it reported doing in 2024

Behavior Health Initiative. One of our significant accomplishments was the Behavioral Health Initiative for East African refugees their families and the community. We provided behavioral health navigation case support and culturally responsive behavioral health services. In addition to their key activities they provided care to 112 individuals. We also provided community education stigma reduction and early self-help. Moreover resource navigation and referrals were provided to 84 individuals and families. Thus we also held 12 community education workshops to reduce the stigma around mental health and increase awareness of substance abuse among the youth. Finally 20 of our youth were engaged in youth-led message development and storytelling workshops. They created and produced videos on immigrant and refugee protection. Additionally they developed a Community Resource Toolkit on mental health tips and stigma- related topics. These were distributed throughout the community. And 9 youth received a paid summer fellowship. Behavioral

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.6%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.3%; rating input score 84; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.8%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.6% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $298K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.