Go On the Mission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271510133
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Silverdale, WA, USA
Phone
3606922231
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$545,674
Expenses
$542,222
Assets
$135,536
Liabilities
$21,982

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Acker (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Acker (Executive Director): $18,167 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

GO equips impoverished children to conquer the cycle of poverty through holistic Christ-centered care, enabling them to become followers of Christ who bring hope and healing to their worlds.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, GO on the Mission continued to expand its global impact, serving children and families across 19 ministry sites in four countries. Through the generosity, prayers, and involvement of supporters, the organization experienced meaningful growth while remaining committed to strong stewardship, gospel-centered ministry, and creating lasting opportunities for children and communities around the world.Through its child sponsorship program, GO on the Mission provided support for 452 children, helping ensure access to education, nutritious meals, discipleship, and ongoing care. Sponsorship continued to be a foundational part of the ministry, creating consistent relationships of encouragement and support while helping children experience increased hope and opportunity for the future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th 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: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.8% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $424K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $18K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.