Rural Education & Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232656376
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4152899949
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$339,528
Expenses
$469,158
Assets
$887,350
Liabilities
$13,409

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SANJANA SHRESTHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEGAN VOLK (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $101,640 total reported compensation
  • SANJANA SHRESTHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $91,227 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Read facilitates the creation of self-sustaining and community-led library and resource centers that serve as a foundational platform for unlocking a communitys social and economic potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

Read centers and programs - read builds cohesive, inclusive, and resilient communities where everyone especially the most marginalized, access and benefit from knowledge, resources, and opportunities necessary to shape their own dignified and fulfillling futures. Reads method of facilitation empowers communities to recognize and believe in their own inherent potential to solve local problems and foster greater prosperity. By fortifying the community library and resource center (read center) as a foundational platform for unlocking a communitys social and economic potential, read initiates enduring community-level transformation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -38.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $376K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $102K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.