Greater Indianapolis Multifaith Alliance
Legal name: Greater Indianapolis Multi-Faith Alliance Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 844429131
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Indianapolis, IN, USA
- Phone
- 317.286.8163
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
- Affiliation
- Interfaith
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $384,038
- Expenses
- $328,144
- Assets
- $233,456
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Rabbi Aaron Spiegel (President & Exec Director)
- Rev Darryn Scheske (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Rabbi Aaron Spiegel (President & Exec Director): $50,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Greater Indianapolis Multifaith Alliance gathers faith leaders representing diverse religious traditions into a sacred friendship, in order to collaborate on civic projects that serve the common good of greater Indianapolis, making our city a more equitable place. The _Greater Indianapolis Multifaith Alliance_ gathers faith leaders representing diverse religious traditions into a sacred friendship, in order to collaborate on civic projects that serve the common good of greater Indianapolis, making our city a more equitable place. GIMA believes that housing is a human right and a moral mandate; and religious diversity brings multi-faith traditions together for the common good. Equity and Justice** directly ties to our mission of making Indianapolis a more equitable place, this value grounds the organization's work in a commitment to social justice. It means not only serving the...
What it reported doing in 2025
Eviction Court Watching: Hoosier families who rent their homes are at a huge disadvantage when they go to a court where the landlord has a lawyer and they dont, and the judge often seems more interested in moving cases along than making sure their rights are protected. Tenants immediately have a much better chance of being treated fairly with a court watcher. Time is crucial. If a judge delays eviction even by two weeks, evictees have time to seek financial assistance, get legal help, or at least find somewhere to live. Additionally, court watchers collect data about what actually happens in eviction court. Answers to questions: Was the tenant represented by council? Was the landlord present? Were the proceedings explained to the tenants? How long did the case last? Were there habitability issues and were they considered in the judges ruling? Were there children in the household? Indpls is one of few cities in the country that has actual data on court proceedings.
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 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $68.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 14.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 109.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 60.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 66.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $287K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.