Return to China Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472169507
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
7372976334
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$185,915
Expenses
$167,816
Assets
$575,413
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Linmei Shu (Executive Director/Board Member)

People named in this filing

  • Linmei Shu (Executive Director/Board Member)
  • Ka Leung Lee (Chairman)
  • Melody Chung (Secretary)

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

The purpose of RTCP is to enable Chinese Christians returning to China to experience successful reentry and integration into a local church. We help them through training, networking, and connecting them with churches in China. The Organization also build supportive relationships with church leaders, missionaries, and fellow Christians in Asian communities, fostering their spiritual growth and guiding them towards effective evangelism, glorifying God and fulfilling the Great Commission.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mentor Program - With a referral system, identify Christian mentees returning to China and match them up with mentors who are mature Christians outside of China and some mentors are even with cross-cultural missionaries experience. Through the mentee and mentor supporting relationship, build up strong Christian foundation for the mentees and eventually expand the God's kingdom. The program also provides scholarship and works on studying pre-return lectures, developing a structured mentoring system, and research returnee problems and solutions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 24th 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: 9.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.43; rating input score 72; 72nd 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: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.6% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.