Refugee Development Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473515841
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Providence, RI, USA
Phone
4013000544
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,421,741
Expenses
$2,225,768
Assets
$1,252,472
Liabilities
$194,874

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TEDDI JALLOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • OMAR BAH (Founder & Co-Exec. Director): $196,056 total reported compensation
  • TEDDI JALLOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $172,594 total reported compensation
  • HAYK BALAYAN (Finance Manager): $121,572 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Refugee dream center is a common venue for community engagement, cultural exchange, and a home away from home for refugees. It is a place for caring, self-help, healing, personal and professional development, and a venue for empowerment, strengths cultivation, and accompaniment toward success.

What it reported doing in 2025

Refugee Dream Center (RDC) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) engaged in reception, placement, and post-resettlement refugees. Our approach is based on offering direct services to receive refugees, and fill gaps in refugee resettlement, while also providing continuation of services to ensure refugee self-reliance and self-sufficiency. We offer direct services in the areas of adult education, employment, legal, case management services, youth support services, health promotion, language and access services, psychosocial support, food and hygiene products distribution, housing, and cash assistance to refugees. RDC is also a strong advocacy agency for the rights of refugees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 71%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $762.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.1%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.3% of revenue deployed · 71% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.