Regional Aid for Interim Needs Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136213586
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bronx, NY, USA
Phone
7188921400
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,242,765
Expenses
$17,861,220
Assets
$15,685,629
Liabilities
$4,304,947

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR ANDERSON TORRES (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • SANDRA MARTINEZ-FULLEDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR ANDERSON TORRES (PRESIDENT/CEO): $449,639 total reported compensation
  • FATMIR TOCI (CFO 12/24/2024): $241,210 total reported compensation
  • SANDRA MARTINEZ-FULLEDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,755 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 operate full-service neighborhood older adult centers and provide home-delivered meals, transportation services, assistance with benefits and entitlements, case management and elder abuse services, in addition to community-based mobile meals for those in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

Healthy food services: healthy food services supports r.a.i.n.'s nutrition programs by preparing and distributing pre-plated meals for the home delivered meals and mobile food programs, as well as providing congregate meals at select older adult centers. This centralized food production ensures consistency, quality, and efficiency across multiple service lines.mobile food kitchen (cucina dolores): the r.a.i.n. Cucina dolores mobile food kitchen addresses food insecurity among homeless individuals and low-income families in the bronx. This initiative delivers hot, nutritious meals directly to underserved communities, providing a reliable source of sustenance and support. The program serves hundreds of individuals daily and operates as a critical frontline response to hunger in high-need areas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $287.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 15.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $15.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $450K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.