Instare Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331938882
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
South Bend, IN, USA
Phone
5748504628
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$160,772
Expenses
$78,313
Assets
$81,531
Liabilities
$1,839

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT GREATHOUSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • RICH GRAMM (BOARD DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT GREATHOUSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

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

Educational programs/spiritual guidance

What it reported doing in 2025

The nonprofit provides educational programs to help youth who have not completed high school obtain their ged, while also offering religious events and spiritual guidance to foster personal and spiritual growth within the community.instare offers a safe place to have quality conversations. From more formal educational programs to organic small group discussions that poke, prod, and examine ideas, and let them stand or fall based on their own merits.instare provides facilities and infrastructure for education programs, lectures, seminars, group discussions, and one-on-one coaching and counseling. These programs are primarily geared to adult learning and development. Irrespective of age, education, status, or income, instare helps people press on to maturity.

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

SUPPORTED - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.9%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.3%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.9% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.