International Churchill Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 320517967
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2029290309
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,454,859
- Expenses
- $1,696,328
- Assets
- $1,551,904
- Liabilities
- $106,619
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JUSTIN REASH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL OCTOBER)
- RANDOLPH CHURCHILL (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JUSTIN REASH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL OCTOBER): $187,535 total reported compensation
- MITCHELL REISS VICE CHAIR (UNTIL OCT., THEN MEMBER): $16,666 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Dedicated to preserving and promoting the historic legacy of sir winston churchill.
What it reported doing in 2024
Publications and communications - ics maintains an educational and outreach website, winstongchurchill.org, publishes finest hour: the journal of winston churchill (quarterly, print and digital) and the churchill bulletin(monthly e-newsletter) to advance public understanding of churchill's life, leadership, and legacy, and maintains educational content on its website. In 2024, ics issued 4 finest hour editions to 2,800 subscribers and 12 churchill bulletin issues to 48,000 subscribers, providing year-round access to historically grounded content.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.3%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 61.1%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 30.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.3% of revenue deployed · 61.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 21 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $223K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 42/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.