Grace Gate Farm
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 334911817
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Lincoln, NE, USA
- Phone
- 4028179396
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Mental Health Association
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,588
- Expenses
- $11,154
- Assets
- $8,434
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kirstie Madsen (President and Treasurer)
- Bryan Madsen (Vice President and Secretary)
People named in this filing
- Kirstie Madsen (President and Treasurer)
- Bryan Madsen (Vice President and Secretary)
- Nicole Allen (Officer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The specific purpose of the organization is to provide a sanctuary for veterans, first responders, families, and children to experience peace, connection, and restoration through the presence of animals and the love of jesus christ.
What it reported doing in 2025
In its first year of operations the organization undertook great efforts to launch its programs for veterans, first responders, families and children to find therapy and restoration in animal welfare and christian messaging. The organization took in its first donations to fund these programs. The company held four outreach programs that impacted about 25 participants. Most program expenses were related to launching a company website and branding, along with professional services related to formation and application to obtain 501(c)(3) status.
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 100% 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.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 43.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.