Harvest Field Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800209377
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
8658066840
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,673
Expenses
$104,061
Assets
$57,571
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG BLACKMON (BOARD MEMBER PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRIAN LLOYD (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TIMOTHY CARR (BOARD MEMBER)
  • GREG BLACKMON (BOARD MEMBER PRESIDENT)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Harvest field ministry is a non-profit, christian organization committed to meeting the spiritual, physical and educational needs of children and families in the improverished country of haiti.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided mdical and dental care to families. Facilitated malnutrition care for children diagnosed with severe malnutrition. Organized and facilited pastor training seminars for church leaders. Provided week long bible schools to children. Funded a residental childrens home that cares for orphaned or abandoned children. Provided a tuition free education to children. Provided food, medical care, and housing repairs / upgrades to elderly widows and families of children with special needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 41
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $95K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 19 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.