Rightsharingofworldresources Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311636209
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, IN, USA
Phone
9379660314
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,099,931
Expenses
$1,032,106
Assets
$3,171,912
Liabilities
$398,551

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRACI HJELT SULLIVAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 1/25 - 6/25)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACQUELINE STILLWELL (GENERAL SECRETARY 7/24 - 12/24): $97,863 total reported compensation
  • TRACI HJELT SULLIVAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 1/25 - 6/25): $10,342 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are called to the right sharing of world resources, from the burdens of poverty and materialism into the abundance of gods love, to work toward equity and lives of dignity through partnerships with our human family throughout the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Each year, rswr distributes 22 to 26 grants in the amount of 6,500 to 7,500 in guatemala, kenya, india, and sierra leone. These grants establish revolving loan funds owned and managed by womens groups. There is one cycle of initial grants to womens groups per year, with grants approved by the board based on the recommendations of country coordinators. A second round of 3,000 grants may also be approved. Before receiving an initial grant, each group must complete up to a year of pre training with the rswr country coordinators, learning about grant responsibilities, group management, self esteem, and savings and loan best practices. Once funded, the country coordinators will work with each group for three years with the first year being the most intensive as groups learn to manage their revolving loan fund and businesses. Every six months to a year, depending on the group strength and experience with rswr, formal site visits will occur to review documents, address challenges, and provide guidance. Additional follow up visits may be conducted if necessary. Continued in sch o

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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; 76th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.07; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $769K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 25 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.