International Samaritan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341811907
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7342220701
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,945,572
Expenses
$4,979,529
Assets
$20,890,326
Liabilities
$50,735

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL TENBUSCH (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW PAWUK (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL TENBUSCH (PRESIDENT): $201,365 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW PAWUK (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIO): $140,327 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To walk hand-in-hand with people in garbage dump communities, along with those with a calling to help, to break the chains of poverty and to improve our lives together.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarshipswith the support of our donors, we provide holistic scholarships to young people from families who live or work in garbage dump communities. Scholarships range from private school tuition at the elementary school level to trade school and university scholarships for older students. Scholars in our program also receive food support for their families when needed, as well as leadership and spiritual development.900 scholars in 7 program sites in 5 nations received scholarships in 2024. These range from elementary age children to scholars pursuing university degrees in engineering, law and medical degrees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -69.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.2; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.