United Voices for Newcomer Rights
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 850866980
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
- Location
- Albuquerque, NM, USA
- Phone
- 5055004727
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,544,824
- Expenses
- $1,367,793
- Assets
- $403,681
- Liabilities
- $105,117
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- RYEORA CHOE (CO-EX.DIRECT): $88,402 total reported compensation
- DANIELLE PARKER (CO-EX.DIRECT): $82,603 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We cultivate educational, economic, cultural, social, and physical and mental health resources in partnership with newcomers (refugees, immigrants, asylum-seekers, and others who are new to the united states) to empower them to achieve system change that supports their well-being and integration in their new communities. We do this by promoting mutual learning to help newcomers and others living in america understand each other and develop and support effective and just policies, collaborating with other organizations, government agencies, and individuals to achieve our vision, developing, implementing, adapting, evaluating, and disseminating programs that benefit newcomers, including the refugee well- being project (an innovative model for connecting newcomers with people and resources in the united states to promote mutual learning and improve mental health), and building capacity and leadership skills of newcomers.
What it reported doing in 2024
Increasing community responsiveness to newcomers/system change: uvnr staff provided information/resources to 21 adult participants in tea circle monthly. Uvnr conducted 3 mental health training sessions with 87 community partners; 41 participants were direct mental health service providers. Uvnr also conducted 3 community coalition meetings with over 14 different collaborating agencies/organization and provided 440 instances of mental health messaging through social media, tabling events, and case managers. Staff dedicated more than 430 hours to system change efforts and participated in over 1,300 meetings, events, and activities, advising on policy affecting newcomer education, healthcare access, mental health services, and detention practices.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $164.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 44th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 11.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 58.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 53.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 35% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.