Gender Equality Network USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920964075
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Lewes, DE, USA
Phone
2013497103
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Rights

Reported finances

Revenue
$496,444
Expenses
$518,014
Assets
$452,246
Liabilities
$447,936

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAY SABE PHYU (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAY SABE PHYU (Executive Director): $11,119 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Global Network Building for Gender Equality and Women's Rights Activists: Fostering exchange, collaboration, and mutual support for joint efforts in capacity building and technical assistance, while deepening the understanding of gender equality.

What it reported doing in 2025

Strengthen Alliances and Institutional Mechanisms for gender equality Under this program, GEN aims to foster a robust network with other women-led organizations by creating opportunities for collaboration and engagement. Through events and networking, GEN has intensified its efforts to spotlight human rights abuses and mobilize global solidarity. GEN hosted UNCSW 69 side events in New York, addressing key issues related to womens participation in gender equality. GEN also hosted the event with partners about the voices of Myanmars women and minorities by highlighting the resilience of women and ethnic minorities, and ordinary people and how they are organizing, surviving, and resisting despite immense challenges.(To be continued)

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 72% 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: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -4.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 35.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 40.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 61.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $433K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.