Elnac Proclaim Cuba

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810998343
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
9723424327
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,669,765
Expenses
$1,552,817
Assets
$514,273
Liabilities
$6,951

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALFIE PINO (President)

People named in this filing

  • ALFIE PINO (President)
  • CAMERON CANTER (Director)
  • EDDIE MARSHALL (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Elnac dba proclaim cuba works closely with a cuban religious organization named elnac. The name is derived from a spanish acronym organization named elnac. The name is derevied from a spanish acronym empoderando las naciones, empowering the nations. While the us cuban entities share a common name, and a common mission to reach the country of cuba, latin america and the world for christ, the association between the two entities is voluntary. Elnac dba proclaim cuba plants and supports churches as well as a multi faceted network of ministries across the island that extends, to latin america and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, ELNAC d.b.a Proclaim Cuba advanced its mission through evangelism, discipleship, leadership training, church planting, and humanitarian assistance. Twenty-eight mission teams comprising 194 volunteers served alongside local churches, while 95 additional volunteers supported U.S.-based ministry events for a total of 289. Accomplishments included sharing the Gospel with 106,563 people; 1,749 accepting Christ; serving 42,403 children through summer programs; providing medical care and medications to 12,581 individuals; delivering crisis relief to 2,200 families; planting 70 home churches; training 1,405 childrens ministry teachers; strengthening 138 pastors; discipling 570 men and 3,874 women; Twelve Saturday Schools provided year-round biblical education, and 15 gas-powered generators were installed in churches and 3 solar powered systems were installed in churches.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.