Foresight Development International Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043565713
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Bedford, MA, USA
Phone
7812753580
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$257,259
Expenses
$188,314
Assets
$200,987
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Ratichek (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Ratichek (President): $31,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Engage in charitable activities in less developed countries, especially Nepal, for the advancement of education, economic and social development, and Christian institutions. Particular activities include the development of a school and sponsoring and mentoring young adults.

What it reported doing in 2025

National Bethel Academy is a school founded in 2008 in the town of Trishuli, Nepal by a team of local church leaders and Foresight staff. The school is intentionally different from traditional Nepali schools as it emphasizes thinking, creative teaching, individual student attention, and respect for individual differences in contrast to the traditional teaching method of mere memorization. The school has approximately 330 students in grades Nursery through 10. Class 10 students have all successfully passed the 10th grade national Secondary Education Examination. Foresight support has been for both educational and managerial development, and for financial needs. Educational and managerial support have included in-person training and both remote and in-person counsel. Financial support has covered the operating deficit, the construction of a roof over the basketball court and a second, new classroom building.

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 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 29
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.7%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th 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: 54%; rating input score 54; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.7% of revenue deployed · 62.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $117K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.