Doulos Mission Church

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
743102379
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$450,976
Expenses
$405,869
Assets
$1,275,098
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EUI JUNG WHANG (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • EUI JUNG WHANG (CEO): $50,040 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To proclaim the full gospel of jesus christ to mankind and to seek convert those who have fallen into sins by performing worships, deploying missionaries to non-christians, and giving AIDS/supports to needy neighbors

What it reported doing in 2013

Programs to furnish AIDS needy-base neighbors and programs to preach bibles and christian life for church members and their families as well as non-church members including non-christians

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 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.7%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 41.9%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 10%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.14; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.7% of revenue deployed · 41.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $170K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.