Rescue The Poor America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821475689
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
+256-393-193-340
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$290,561
Expenses
$288,951
Assets
$5,634
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rex Whisenhunt (Founding Director / CEO)
  • Dave Prout (Director - President)
  • Jack Hays (Director - Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Rex Whisenhunt (Founding Director / CEO)
  • Dave Prout (Director - President)
  • Jack Hays (Director - Vice President)

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 rescue the weak and the needy, showing kindness as required by the LORD.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supporting orphanage operations of Rescue the Poor Uganda NGO which includes the main orphanage in Entebbe which services 15 children and 3 caretakers and 27 children in the program at the village of Kakiri. We provide rent, utilities, food, medical, school fees, transport, and supplies. All children served advanced in grade level during 2025. These children would not survive without our support. A gardening project was supported as well.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • 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: 98.9%; 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 0.6%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 3; 3rd 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 25.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 79.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 99.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $289K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • 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.