Institute for Worship Studies Florida Campus Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593576254
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jacksonville, FL, USA
Phone
9042642172
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$821,549
Expenses
$902,398
Assets
$500,037
Liabilities
$101,354

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CONSTANCE CHERRY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CONSTANCE CHERRY (PRESIDENT): $66,457 total reported compensation
  • EMIL ALBERTINI (CFO): $22,667 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The institute for worship studies forms servant leaders in christian worship renewal and education through graduate academic praxis, grounded in biblical, historical, theological, cultural and missiological reflection in community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Intensive courses of biblical studies are held during the year with follow up for students via the internet. Eight courses are offered for the master of worship studies and six courses for the doctor of worship studies. Total enrollment for the fiscal year was approximately 171 students. 19 master of worship studies degrees were conferred and 20 doctor of worship studies degrees were conferred from july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2019. The advance graduate certificates are all doctoral level work excluding the dissertation. Two of these certificates were awarded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.2%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 45.8%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.2% of revenue deployed · 45.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $414K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.