Romanian United Foundation

Legal name: Romanian United Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842755681
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, United States
Phone
+1 (773) 289-8696
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,074,758
Expenses
$975,119
Assets
$247,341
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mihai Lehene (President)

People named in this filing

  • Dan Nicolae (Director)
  • Cristian Merdariu (Director)
  • Marius Stan (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support Romanian communities and the diaspora by funding projects that improve lives, foster cultural connections, and empower local initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2024

General Mission Support - organization conducted numerous smaller mission-aligned activities, community aid efforts, grantmaking to partner organizations, cultural programs, and volunteer-led initiatives that together advanced education, health, poverty relief, civic engagement, and cultural development of the Romanian community. These programs involve multiple projects, micro-grants, and community events not individually large enough to be listed as a primary program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 9.7%; rating input score 10; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 9.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $802K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 10/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.