China Services Ventures
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411991293
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Arden Hills, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6127203797
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Protestant
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $294,974
- Expenses
- $187,936
- Assets
- $284,773
- Liabilities
- $14,724
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jeffery Nellermoe (Executive Director)
- Sonja Hinderlie (President)
- Tom Stertz (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jeffery Nellermoe (Executive Director): $43,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of China Service Ventures is to provide readiness to act upon service opportunities relating to China and to do this through groups and individuals dedicated to this goal and committed to personal enrichment through study on China exchange of resources and personnel which further this goal and to work for the welfare of the Chinese people including those in our midst.
What it reported doing in 2024
Light 2 Path is an English language learning project that links trained English as a Second Language Instructors with the children of Chinese pastors who live in mainland China and home-school their children. L2P also provides live instruction and support to English learners in China.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.
The verdict
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 36
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 31.9%; rating input score 32
- Program expense ratio: 49.4%; rating input score 49
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 59th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -16.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 31.9% of revenue deployed · 49.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 12 filed program accomplishments · $93K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $43K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 32/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.