Big Creek Missions
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 261312622
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bear Branch, KY, USA
- Phone
- 8655562772
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,702,562
- Expenses
- $1,413,223
- Assets
- $2,405,687
- Liabilities
- $24,438
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KEVIN ROGERS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KEVIN ROGERS (PRESIDENT): $46,369 total reported compensation
- RUSSELL DRUMMER (VICE PRESIDE): $31,700 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Big creek missions is a christian ministry center in bear branch, Kentucky that works to connect churches and volunteer groups from across the country with needs that exist in the leslie, clay and perry county areas. Our primary task is to locate ministry opportunities for churches who travel to our area, in addition to providing accomodations for those groups. By connecting these churches with needs, we are able to reach out to our community in several ways. We offer: free home repairs (major and minor projects); community programs (providing volunteers and goods for multiple ministris); children's programs (tutoring, daycamps, clothing, hygiene kits); food distribution; and teen outreach. Our services are offered without regard to the person's race, religion or social standing. By providing these services, and connecting churches with needs here in our community, we hope to nurture positive relationships that will continue to benefit the community here at big creek, in addition to pr
What it reported doing in 2024
Home repairs: big creek missions was able to provide extensive home repairs for over 50 homes in our community. We were able to accomplish these repairs by recruiting and mobilizing a volunteer base of over 700 dedicated solely to construction work. Most of the residents of these homes were low-income or disabled residents who could not afford the supplies or complete the project on their own. Services included roof replacement, wheelchair ramps, weatherization and interior home repairs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.