Choshen Farm Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208708011
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Spokane, WA, USA
Phone
5099517474
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$808,303
Expenses
$809,885
Assets
$216,638
Liabilities
$42,289

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chandelle Micklich (President)
  • Arum Lansel (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Bethany Colvin (Co-Director): $84,177 total reported compensation
  • Jeremy Colvin (Co-Director): $84,117 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 mission of Choshen Farm is to impact rural Zambia for Christ through relational encouragement, community development, and strengthening of the local church.

What it reported doing in 2024

COMMUNITY HEALTH: The community health initiative partners with the local clinic to provide follow-up care particularly to patients with wounds and burns needing more continual attention. Additionally, the food security initiative is folded into community health via its emphasis on household nutrition. The feeding program at the school specifically serves lunch to over 400 children per day and 30 expecting mothers that are housed near the school. Choshen continues to serve also as an ambulance to the closest hospital.

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 71% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $697K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.