Colegio Biblico

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
746020879
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eagle Pass, TX, USA
Phone
8307733110
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$630,788
Expenses
$628,680
Assets
$1,126,715
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel Llamas (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel Llamas (President): $40,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To operate a college for the purpose of training young people (men and women) to preach the Gospel in all nations, especially to the Spanish speaking world; so that Churches of Christ after the New Testament pattern may be established.

What it reported doing in 2024

To operate a college for the purpose of training young people (men and women) to preach the Gospel in all nations, especially to the Spanish speaking world; so that Churches of Christ after the New Testament pattern may be established.Total class hours for the Spring of 2024 was 71 with seven full time professors and 2 part time professors at both campuses. The class hours for the Fall of 2024 was 77 with six full time professors and 2 part time professors at both campuses.Ten students graduated from the program in 2024.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 37th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 0.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.8% of revenue deployed · 70.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $446K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.