East-West Ministries
Legal name: East-West Ministries International
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752486132
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2016
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- Plano, TX, USA
- Phone
- 972.941.4500
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $17,959,212
- Expenses
- $17,806,811
- Assets
- $7,803,446
- Liabilities
- $89,401
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kurt Nelson (CEO)
- Mario Zandstra (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Kurt Nelson (CEO): $306,635 total reported compensation
- John Maisel (Chairman Emeritus/Founder): $201,067 total reported compensation
- Seth Kolb (Exec. VP of Operations): $140,904 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To glorify God by multiplying followers of Jesus in the spiritually darkest areas of the world. In about one week, you can take the gospel to those who have never heard it. Short-term mission teams allow believers like you to visit unreached communities, share the good news of Jesus, and support local churches—usually in less than 10 days! East-West operates in more than 40 countries across 10 major world regions. Short-term mission teams travel to many of these nations. These teams work closely with field leaders and national partners to strategically share the gospel where it’s most needed. Join a team.
What it reported doing in 2016
Multiply: Globally, East-West is specifically focused on areas of unreached people groups or areas with no previous substantial form of evangelism, discipleship or church planting. We primarily seek to work through existing local partnerships by investing in and training nationals. There are many who desire to further the gospel and even plant new churches; however, they have never been provided with the tools or training to accomplish such a task. Therefore, our end goal is to provide nationals with the skills and resources necessary to plant rapidly multiplying churches. The church planting process begins with evangelism in new areas or seeking to partner with local believers in areas of existing work. Once these relationships are established, we provide training in evangelism and church planting, forming specific strategies for each individual about how and where to share one's faith, how many groups will be started, and how many leaders will be trained. Long-term accountability is provided through follow-up trainings, and those who demonstrate obedience are sent to areas of unreached peoples to evangelize and establish reproducible churches. The church planting efforts throughout each of our fields are unique, therefore requiring a distinct approach in each field of ministry. While some areas are still in the beginning stages of evangelism, others are experiencing rapid multiplication. Despite the many obstacles faced in various parts of the world, our on-site staff and national partners persist with diligence, desiring to engage the unreached with the saving grace of Jesus through reproducing churches.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.5%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 78.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $13.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $307K · 19 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $906K reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.