International Missionary Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200069019
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Nampa, ID, USA
Phone
2082300959
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$560,495
Expenses
$252,260
Assets
$461,462
Liabilities
$288

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Cosmo Zimik (Director)
  • David Brown (Board Member)
  • Mark Sneed (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

International MIssionary Network offers education via three schools for children in India pastoral training for pastors in India and Africa and around the world and mentoring and martial arts for at-risk youth in Nampa Idaho.

What it reported doing in 2025

Chi Ching Academy in Sinakeithei Village Manipur India provides education for school driven from ages 3-15. This school has 250 students and 17 teachers. Some students are unable to pay and so they are offered scholarships for schooling and boarding. Chi Ching Academy staff also serve as administrators for two other schools IMN supports in Manipur.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 71% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.7%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $89.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 55%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.83; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.7% of revenue deployed · 59.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $150K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.