Firm Foundation in Christ Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463741710
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Beaverton, OR, USA
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$599,156
Expenses
$659,661
Assets
$97,365
Liabilities
$33,533

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD GARDNER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD GARDNER (PRESIDENT): $103,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

FFICM helps new believers build a firm foundation for their faith based on a strong relationship with Christ. FFICM programs teach how to follow up with new believers and enable them to have a strong relationship with Christ.

What it reported doing in 2022

Training and Equipping: FFICM equips national evangelists, pastors, and church leaders to evangelize, as well as follow up with new believers. We train them to show new believers how to develop a life-long faith in Jesus. Most trainings are for a full week, at the end of which each participant has practiced evangelism and follow-up in the classroom and outside in the surrounding villages. We equip each person with materials that have been translated and adapted to their culture, so that they can continue to effectively reach people in their area and train others in evangelism and follow-up. Each participant is expected to train at least 10 others. Their supervisors help and encourage them to reach their goal.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 53.7%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 18th 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: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.9%; rating input score 82; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st 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: -10.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 53.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $354K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2022
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.