As We Go Missions

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992984057
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Shelton, WA, USA
Phone
3604902738
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$240,797
Expenses
$212,711
Assets
$53,487
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRUCE THACKER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • VICTORIA BLACK (TREASURER)
  • ROGER PETERSON (BOARD MEMBER)
  • NATHAN SARTORI (BOARD MEMBER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

We believe that indigenous churches are in the best place to serve the kingdom in their culture. Our purpose is to assist these churches and mission organizations around the world. As we go missions comes alongside foreign missions and churches through encouragement, education and financial support. We help us churches to experience missions through short-term trips, helping both grow the kingdom of god.

What it reported doing in 2025

Since 1980, amor ministries has been dedicated to keeping families together. Children whose families couldnt afford to provide for their basic needs would be sent away to live at orphanages, so we began building homes to keep more families together. In zimbabwe, africa, we build homes for under-housed people. We invite members of the church of christ in zimbabwe to apply for a scholarship to attend a christian college to train for ministry. In haiti and kenya missions for teaching and preaching in rual villages.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 117.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 71.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $213K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.