Women's Refugee Commission Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463668128
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125513111
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,559,429
Expenses
$6,259,075
Assets
$4,469,485
Liabilities
$993,434

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH COSTA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ELDAR KEKIC (VICE-PRESIDENT, FINANCE & ADMIN.)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH COSTA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $297,259 total reported compensation
  • MELANIE NEZER (VP, ADVOCACY & EXTERNAL AFFAIRS): $236,111 total reported compensation
  • KATHERINE ACERRA (SENIOR DIRECTOR, INDIVIDUAL GIVING): $217,587 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 improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. The women's refugee commission envisions a world in which refugees are safe, healthy and reliant and seeks to drive change in humanitarian practice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Gender-based violence: around the world, up to six of every ten women experience physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime. During war or other humanitarian crises-such as the brutal conflict currently occurring in syria-the risks to women and girls are heightened. With the breakdown of moral and social order that occurs during emergencies, women and girls are particularly vulnerable to physical abuse and exploitation, rape and human trafficking. Perpetrators may be family members, neighbors or others in the community, members of armed groups or, in some instances, humanitarian workers. Even after a crisis abates, gender-based violence (gbv) may continue at high levels as communities struggle to heal and rebuild. Wrc is part of the multi-stakeholder initiative, call to action to address gbv in emergencies. This includes supporting the government lead (canada in 2018 - 2020/ denmark in 2021 -2023), supporting rollout at the country level, analyzing partner commitments to address gaps, and capturing progress against the call to action roadmap indicators. Wrc also leads global efforts on researching sexual violence against displaced men, boys, and lgbtqia+ populations and has put these undeserved populations on the humanitarian agenda through fact-finding research, the development of guidance and resources, and the provision of technical assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -75.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 69% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 9 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $297K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $242K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.