Aselsi USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465696734
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Columbia, MO, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$499,587
Expenses
$560,809
Assets
$45,469
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bernadette Hereth (President)

People named in this filing

  • Bernadette Hereth (President)
  • Scott Boyd (Director)
  • David Boyd (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide training, mentoring, financial support, and volunteer teams to organizations who, in turn, educate, equip, and provide practical services to pastors, church leaders, and families primarily indigenous people groups of the Western hemisphere.

What it reported doing in 2025

TRAINING THE TRAINERS Executive Director communicates weekly with an organziation in Guatemala that operates a central training facility near Chichicastenago and is establishing extension centers in outlying areas of United States, Guatemala, Mexico, Venezula, and Ghana. Executive Director and Treasurer review financial statements, consult regularly to advise the Guatemalan accountant to asess the handling of financial transactions. The Executive Director advises via Zoom calls with similar training centers located in Latino communities in the US.

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 96% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.9%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 61st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -12.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.9% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $499K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • 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.