In Touch Mission International
Legal name: In Touch Mission International Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942783852
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tempe, Arizona, USA
- Phone
- (480) 968-4100
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,350,798
- Expenses
- $1,210,021
- Assets
- $2,487,210
- Liabilities
- $8,550
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVE EVERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVE EVERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $80,132 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
In Touch Mission International seeks to partner with and enhance the ministries of godly national Christians who are reaching their communities with the Gospel of Jesus Christ and making disciples.
What it reported doing in 2024
Partners with national christians and u.s. Citizens who have lived long term in the field. These individuals face a variety of challenges as they reach their communities for christ and present the gospel to the people they serve. We trust god to provide for their needs and the tools necessary to reach their communities through funds provided by charitable contributions. Their needs include facilities, education, training, funding for bibles, and other needs. We chose to partner with those supported because of their knowledge of their communities, including culture, local needs, they speak the language, and because the cost is far less than sending and maintaining american missionaries in the field. We have ministry partners in poland, romania, south africa, sudan, uganda, zambia, and india.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 69% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 66
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $23.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 95.4%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 10 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 78% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.