Islamic Center of Siouxland
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 421456513
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- South Sioux City, NE, United States
- Phone
- 4024945798
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Service Clubs
- Affiliation
- Islam
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $66,085
- Expenses
- $39,941
- Assets
- $457,371
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AHMAD MOHAMMAD (PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)
- SAEED BASHATAH (VICE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- AHMAD MOHAMMAD (PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)
- MUHAMMAD SAJID (SECRETARY AND DIRECTOR)
- AHSAN ALAHI (TREASURER AND DIRECTOR)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Pursuance of islam and islamic activity
What it reported doing in 2025
Assisting muslims in the sioux city and surrounding communities in carrying out islamic activities in pursuance of islam as a complete way of life
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.2%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 68.2%; rating input score 68
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.6%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.45; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -18.3% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 41.2% of revenue deployed · 68.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 6 affiliation controls reported
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.