Christians for Israel International
Legal name: C4i Christians for Israel
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461508029
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Nijkerk, FL, Netherlands
- Phone
- +31 (0)33-4220405
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,254,351
- Expenses
- $1,844,716
- Assets
- $2,623,482
- Liabilities
- $4,747
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- REV DR JOHN TWEEDIE (PRESIDENT/CEO/DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- REV DR JOHN TWEEDIE (PRESIDENT/CEO/DIRECTOR)
- DENNIS MAREK (SECRETARY/TREASURER/DIRECT)
- DREW PATRICK (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Christians for Israel (C4I) is a non-denominational movement. Our mission is to bring Biblical understanding in the Church and among the nations concerning God’s purposes for Israel and to promote comfort of Israel through prayer and action. We believe that all Christians should be **united in their love for the Jewish people** , in their support for the nation of Israel and in their collective repentance because of Jewish suffering throughout Church history. Since its establishment in the Netherlands in 1979, C4I has developed into a growing **global movement** of local C4I operations with over **150,000 supporters** from **all Christian denominations**. Our vision is to establish a global network...
What it reported doing in 2024
To provides education to christians in north america about jewish history and anti-semitism through media, docmentary and television teaching series. Also to relieve poverty in israel through the provision of housing and food for the homeless through funding partner organizations in the categories of feed the hungry, children at risk, humanitarian aid and new immigrants.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.2%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 43.3%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 34.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 43.2% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.