Irco

Legal name: The Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930806295
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
503.234.0068
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,361,703
Expenses
$65,543,967
Assets
$22,908,428
Liabilities
$8,455,541

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAILA HAJOO (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW MCCLELLAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHKAN JAFARI (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LEE PO CHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEE PO CHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $290,273 total reported compensation
  • TANJA LUX (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $188,612 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 welcome, serve, and empower refugees, immigrants, and people across cultures and generations to reach their full potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other irco programs include the following: early learning services division, which provides high-quality educational experiences and nurturing learning environments for every child, while equipping parents and guardians with the necessary resources to flourish. Youth & academic services division, which engages youth to realize their full potential through culturally informed, strengths-based practices and services. Affordable housing development, in which irco partners with experienced for profit and nonprofit developers to increase access to affordable, culturally appropriate housing and resident services for immigrant and refugee communities and the community at large.cultural centers & hubs, which engage communities across Oregon and southwest Washington, including irco's culturally specific centers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $46.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.3% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $56.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $290K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $4.9M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.