Rural Shepherds Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
342030872
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Bigfork, MT, USA
Phone
4067527788
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$51,493
Expenses
$30,550
Assets
$39,950

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JERRY ROYLANCE (VICE PRESIDE)
  • TOM POSSIN (SECRETARY)
  • KURT RAU (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

Rural shepherds network exists for the purpose of planting, strengthening and multiplying strong local churches in rural communities; and to encourage, promote and nurture meaningful relationships among rural ministers, equiping and enabling them to be more effecitve in their callings. Rural shepherds network provides a system of relational support for those who will plant or catalyze the planting of new churches, and those who are already ministering in rural areas, by providing training opportunities, mentoring, networking and ministry resources.

What it reported doing in 2025

Organization promotes and strengthens rural churches by providing encouragement, training, networking, mentoring and ministry resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.7%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.