I58 Global
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 811367282
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lancaster, PA, USA
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,336,905
- Expenses
- $1,401,443
- Assets
- $1,251,780
- Liabilities
- $124,728
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Amos Kauffman (President)
- Emanuel Esh (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Amos Kauffman (President): $92,700 total reported compensation
- Nathanael Shrock (At large and Executive Field Direct): $54,384 total reported compensation
- Naomi Byler (Secretary): $48,019 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
I58 Global is a Christian ministry dedicated to recruiting, sending and organizing relief workers to provide aid and share hope to refugees in various European countries.
What it reported doing in 2024
I58 Global is a Christian ministry dedicated to recruiting, sending and organizing relief workers to provide aid and share hope to refugees in various European countries. Much of the work is performed by short-term volunteers. i58s staff interacts with refugees on a regular basis and assist in providing various forms of humanitarian aid and they make themselves available to form relationships, being a source of encouragement inspite of the difficult circumsatnces that are being faced by those seeking a better and more stable life.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.