Christian Blind Mission Internat'l Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362959883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
8009372264
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,188,828
Expenses
$1,156,341
Assets
$8,496,359
Liabilities
$477,998

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR PETER SCHIESSL (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR M BABAR QURESHI (SECRETARY): $188,722 total reported compensation
  • DR PETER SCHIESSL (CEO): $159,041 total reported compensation
  • THORSTEN SCHMIDT (TREASURER): $148,983 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Christian blind mission international is an international christian development organization committed to improving the quality of life of persons with disabilities in the poorest countries of the world. (continued on schedule o)based on its christian values and over 100 years of expertise, cbm addresses poverty as a cause, and a consequence, of disability, and works in partnership to create a society for all.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cbm us and its partners overseas provide aid to children, women and men with visual, hearing, physical and mental disabilities. We support doctors, nurses, physical therapists, and community-based rehabilitation workers. Cbm us also provides mobility devices like wheelchairs, walkers and artificial limbs. Cbm us implements rehabilitation, education and microfinance programs to improve the quality of life of people living with disabilities in the poorest countries of the world.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 47
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • 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: Pass
    • 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: 25%; rating input score 25; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.35; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $947K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.