Reaching a Generation USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205573610
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9195392634
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,861,932
Expenses
$2,059,548
Assets
$217,193
Liabilities
$11,039

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jacques van Bommel (President)
  • Debra Sowers (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Vergil Kjerstad (Board Member)
  • Vivian R Edwards (Secretary-Treasurer)
  • Paul Ivaska (Board Member)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Reaching a Generation USA Inc . ("RaG-US") establishes relationships with Christian African ministries and missionaries who provide education, sustenance, and health care services for at-risk children, teens, and orphans in southern Africa. Working through these relationships, RaG-US provided a variety of practical supports for care-givers and the children under their care. RaG-US provided direct financial support for the care of needy children to address their immediate and long-term needs through funding to southern African organizations. RaG-US provides logistics and training to volunteers who traveled to Africa to provide life-skill seminars for southern African school teachers, provide relief workers for orphans and to provide logistics and other supports for the work among children. RaG-US raised awareness in the United States regarding the needy condition of African children by supporting volunteers to visit African children, work in feeding stations and medical clinics,

What it reported doing in 2024

Reaching a Generation USA Inc . ("RaG-US") establishes relationships with Christian African ministries and missionaries who provide education, sustenance, and health care services for at-risk children, teens, and orphans in southern Africa. Working through these relationships, RaG-US provided a variety of practical supports for care-givers and the children under their care. RaG-US provided direct financial support for the care of needy children to address their immediate and long-term needs through funding to southern African organizations. RaG-US provides logistics and training to volunteers who traveled to Africa to provide life-skill seminars for southern African school teachers, provide relief workers for orphans and to provide logistics and other supports for the work among children. RaG-US raised awareness in the United States regarding the needy condition of African children by supporting volunteers to visit African children, work in feeding stations and medical clinics, and to minister to emotional, physical and medical conditions. Over the course of the year, examples of our supported organizations activities include: (1) Digging of hundreds of water wells in bush communities in the Sioma District of Zambia. (2) Partnerships with other NGOs to provide medical and dental treatment and medications for thousands of villagers in western Zambia. (3) Maintained feeding programs to provide weekday meals for more than 2,000 students in small public schools in rural villages in Zambia. (4) Expanded Centreshot programs to teach character development to thousands of students in schools across eight provinces in South Africa and began the program in Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe. (5) Through a network of support centers, provided counseling and practical help for almost 150,000 clients in crisis pregnancies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% 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: 61
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $156.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 48.7%; rating input score 49; 28th 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -10.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.9% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.