Bob Russell Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204963036
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5025487116
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$321,186
Expenses
$351,065
Assets
$538,316
Liabilities
$3

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • C KENT HATFIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS ELLSWORTH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT L RUSSELL (CHAIRMAN): $24,000 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS ELLSWORTH (PRESIDENT): $19,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide instruction, training, education and mentoring of young pastors of the christian faith. Through the "time of refreshing retreats" the organization provides counseling for young pastors in how to balance their work and family life.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization administers a program of christian benevolence using biblical principles and scriptural admonitions to alleviate suffering and hardship resulting from poverty, unemployment, disease, illness, accident, injury, or poor health, disability, bereavement, deprivation of educational training or opportunity, or other causes of physical, mental, spiritual, or economic distress. Beneficiaries of such grants may include widows, orphans, expectant mothers and other individuals upon recommendation of a pastor. Beneficiaries of such grants may also include christian churches, church-based ministries, or other christian ministries that minister to those affected by the enumerated causes and conditions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $40.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80.6%; rating input score 81; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.9% of revenue deployed · 67.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $238K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.