Dustin Chamberlain Memorial Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461173912
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Siloam Springs, AR, USA
Phone
4795497005
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$300,493
Expenses
$292,601
Assets
$265,310
Liabilities
$1,206

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON CHAMBERLAIN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GREG BASKIN (DIRECTOR)
  • DANAE CHAMBERLAIN (DIRECTOR)
  • DR CARL DUNCAN (DIRECTOR)

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

Dustins dream is a foundation that has been established to help fund mission trips and medical mission projects in poverty stricken countries. The organization also provides college scholarships to students who desire to enter a medical profession. Our primary goal is to further the kingdom of god and honor our son, dustin, who lost his life in a tragic home invasion december 15, 2011. Dustin was a sophomore at baylor university in the pre-med program at the time of his death. He was very excited about his future and serving others. We are hoping, through dustins dream, to accomplish some of the things here on earth that dustin will not be able to accomplish. Dustin was focused on helping to meet medical needs and had an interest in being involved in missions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dustins dream is a foundation that has been established to provide college scholarships for students desiring to enter the medical profession and to assist with medical mission projects in third world countries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 91.8%; rating input score 92; 53rd 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $276K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.