Rotary District 7770 Youth Exchange of South Carolina Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260541461
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Gilbert, SC, USA
Phone
8039170108
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,000
Expenses
$30,942
Assets
$48,603
Liabilities
$4,627

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ALLISON H FORD (SEC/TREAS)
  • LOU MELLO (PAST CHAIR)
  • KATE SAMUEL (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Youth exchange began during the 1920s as an effort between a handful of clubs in europe. These european exchanges continued until world war ii and resumed in 1946. The reciprocal long-term academic exchange grew in popularity during the 1950s and became the primary rotary youth exchange. In 1972, the rotary international board of directors agreed to recommend youth exchange to rotary clubs worldwide as a worthwhile international activity. Exposure to different cultures ranks as one of the most powerful ways to promote international understanding and peace. The rotary youth exchange program provides thousands of young students the opportunity to meet people from other countries and to experience new cultures, planting the seeds for a lifetime of international understanding.

What it reported doing in 2025

See primary exempt purpose

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 99.8%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 99.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.