Joshua Campaign International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770555097
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5592947400
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$190,568
Expenses
$180,090
Assets
$37,779
Liabilities
$2,966

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KARL HARGESTAM (President)
  • BRIAN MORIN (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARL HARGESTAM (President): $15,000 total reported compensation
  • DEANNA M WRIGHT (Executive Admin): $5,600 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Program Ethiopia, to extend the word of Jesus Christ to Ethiopians

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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.3% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $149K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.