Roever Educational Assistance Programs International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900498275
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8172382000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$902,003
Expenses
$800,612
Assets
$330,477
Liabilities
$34,496

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVE ROEVER (PRESIDENT/DI)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVE ROEVER (PRESIDENT/DI): $213,493 total reported compensation
  • THEIN N DANG (COO): $119,742 total reported compensation
  • PAUL REED (CFO): $108,459 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The roever educational assistance program perpetuates effective christian evangelism throughout the entire world, commencing with the individual, and in groups, through the surrounding communities, as part of the body of christ and to teach and train, ordain and send, ministers and teachers, exhorters and personal evangelism practitioners, and to share our faith, philosophies and practices with all those who may want to become part of our mission, to carry the message of jesus christ around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Roever educational assistance programs international proclaims and teaches the gospel of christ through personal and online biblical training and discipleship largely to vietnam and other nations who have a large population of vietnamese speaking individuals. More than 300,000 students are currently enrolled or have completed the discipleship study program in southeast asia, india and/or are enrolled in the bible school in africa.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% 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: 62
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 11.2%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.7% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $609K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.