Coordinated Christian Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592898115
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brick, NJ, USA
Phone
7784129445
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$135,187
Expenses
$148,936
Assets
$4,143
Liabilities
$1

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DOUGLAS W ANDERSON (INTERNAT'L DIR)
  • JOHN FEAVER (NATIONAL DIRECT)
  • ERIC BRADLEY (Treasurer)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ccm was founded for the purpose of empowering those who have been persucuted and are doomed to poverty in east africa. The mission provides the needy with a future hope by giving them skills to earn a living and financial assistance. Ccm's basic principles are spirituality, simplicity

What it reported doing in 2024

In ethiopia, africa --(formerly fetlework memorial programs)-- these programs are designed to provide help and assistance to vulnerable people in need: (1) orphans program - orphans or abandoned children are placed with loving adults and are provided financial assistance to meet the family units' needs. Financial assistance is also provided to families who are financially unable to provide for these needy children.(2) gene sanders memorial program--english and other skills are taught within a network throughout ethiopia.(3) special needs program--helps to provide for the needs of handicapped people in ethiopia.(4) seniors program -- helps to provide for the needs of displace or abandoned seniors in ethopia.(5) emergency benevolence (formerly special alms) -- provides onetime financial assistance in a crisis situation.(6) overshepherds

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $391.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • 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: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 36% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $126K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.