Resilience Across Borders Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815265226
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Phone
3018577523
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Disorders

Reported finances

Revenue
$145,709
Expenses
$58,756
Assets
$208,855
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KARAN LAMB PSYD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARY ALVORD PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • MARIA ZIMMITTI PHD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY FALLON MA (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARAN LAMB PSYD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $10,800 total reported compensation
  • MARY FALLON MA (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $5,705 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Resilience across borders is dedicated to advancing health equity by expandingaccess to evidence-based mental health prevention programs for children andadolescents, particularly those from underserved communities. Our core initiative, the resilience builder program-universal (rbp-u), delivers practical, research-backed tools that empower youth to build emotional resilience, strengthenbehavioral regulation, and develop cognitive coping skills essential for lifelongwell-being. Grounded in over two decades of resilience science, rbp-u is designedfor scalability and accessibility across diverse educational settings. In addition toserving students directly, we provide structured training and resources for educators, caregivers, and parents ensuring a holistic, community centered approach thatsupports sustained mental health outcomes both in and out of school.

What it reported doing in 2025

Preventive youth programs in 2025, rab expanded its impact on youth mental health and resilience across school and community settings. We trained 30 public school teachers who delivered the rbp u to over 600 fifth grade students, and we partnered with two Washington, d.c.area after school nonprofits to provide the program to over 250 students. Over 700 students participated in the rbp u in 2025, all from under resourced communitiesadvancing our mission to promote equity and reduce barriers to high quality preventive mental health support. The year also marked our first implementation outside the mid atlantic region, laying groundwork for future national scaling of our resilience model.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 62% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.1%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 59.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.55; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.1% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $53K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.