Iris Abilene Camp Barkeley
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464309697
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2020
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Buffalo Gap, TX, USA
- Phone
- 3256699053
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Interfaith Coalitions
- Affiliation
- Interfaith
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $34,975
- Expenses
- $67,628
- Assets
- $82,971
- Liabilities
- $2,272
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANGEL POORMAN (President)
- HEIDI BARKER (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- ANGEL POORMAN (President)
- NORM POORMAN (CHAIRMAN OF BRD)
- HEIDI BARKER (Vice President)
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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Primary exempt purpose - we are committed to working with local leaders with the aim of furthering the advancement of god's kingdom in serving the poor and underprivileged through feeding programs, medical care, training programs for local and international ministers, conference hosting and local pastoral care. We partner with organizations nationally and internationally who aid countries in bringing relief.
What it reported doing in 2020
Religious activity
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 30.5%; rating input score 31
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -93.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59% of revenue deployed · 30.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.