Church of God in Arkansas Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710728923
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Little Rock, AR, USA
Phone
5012315424
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,188
Expenses
$100,790
Assets
$356,166
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANNY SMITH (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES BURCHFIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DANNY SMITH (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES BURCHFIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GREG BOMAR (COMMITTITEEMAN)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of ghogar shall be to network, equip, and support affiliated congregations and their leaders for their effective involvement in gods mission and the fulfillment of the great commission; by creating and maintaining that will strength, supplement, and promoted affiliates

What it reported doing in 2025

The purpose of chogar is to conduct business as the legally incorporated body of the church of god in Arkansas, inc: to buy, acquire, sell, exchange, use, hold and mortgage property, real, intellectual, electronic, and personal, in connection with the work and mission of chogar.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.6%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.53; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.9% of revenue deployed · 41.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 22 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.