RF Catalytic Capital
Legal name: Rf Catalytic Capital Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 852150251
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2128528361
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $167,640,233
- Expenses
- $178,269,283
- Assets
- $268,620,483
- Liabilities
- $88,583,593
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NATALYE PAQUIN (PRESIDENT)
- WOOCHONG UM (CEO OF GEAPP (AS OF 10/2024))
- JOSEPH KARANJA NGANGA (INTERIM CEO OF GEAPP (THRU 10/24))
- PETER COLAVITO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, IOF)
Highest reported compensation
- NATALYE PAQUIN (PRESIDENT): $967,984 total reported compensation
- ERICA GUYER (SECRETARY): $624,750 total reported compensation
- KEITH OLSON (TREASURER (AS OF 03/2024)): $603,006 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
RFCC exists as a mechanism to channel funding to places and people in a faster and more efficient manner, serving both investors and recipients with visionary solutions that help solve today's most urgent challenges.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ppi pandemic prevention institute, llc (ppi): ppi aims to build an equitable, representative network of public health data systems that respects sovereignty, upholds the highest ethical standards, and empowers decision-makers to responds efficiently and effectively to pathogen threats. During 2022, because of significant shifts in pandemic prevention and overall response landscape, the management of rockefeller foundation and rfcc decided to no longer pursue the pandemic prevention institute (ppi) as a separate subsidiary of rfcc. The decision is based on rockefeller foundation's belief that the best way to ensure the world has the capacity to prevent future pandemics is to manage this initiative internally and engage more deeply with organizations that share a common ambition. Rockefeller foundation will continue to leverage and take advantage of opportunities that exist in the pandemic prevention landscape, through existing capacity and connections that were cultivated as part of rockefeller foundation's broader climate and health strategy.expenses $3,599,300 including grants of $0 line 4d-the economic opportunity coalition (eoc): eoc aims to align private and federal investments toward addressing economic disparities, accelerating opportunity and creating wealth in low income, rural and other underserved communities across america expenses $ 739,875 including grants of $0line 4d-periodic table of food initiative (ptfi): brings forward to a vision to transform contribution of food diversity to human health and agricultural sustainability. Ptfi will identity food composition through distribution, receipt and analysis of food sample kits using mass spectrometry. In an effort to democratize information at global scale, results will be stored in a centralized database available to any institution, public lab, or private lab. Ptfi aims to create a centralized infrastructure for institutions and labs around the world to support research and innovation in the fields of food, diet, health, nutrition and environment. Expenses $ 500,000 including grants of $500,000line 4d-climate x health: supports the commissioning of a white paper launched at the 55th annual meeting of the world economic forum. It was supported by three endorsing organizations of the cop28 guiding principles for financing climate and health solutions.expenses $ 321,906 including grants of $0 line 4d-bretton woods initiative at 80 (bwi @ 80): convening the collective knowledge of the world to develop a future economic strategy that financially empowers the global south. Expenses $ 93,787 including grants of $0
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 63
- Accountability: 60
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96.8%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $70.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 4th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 43.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $172.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $968K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.1M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 43 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 113 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 119 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.