Kingdom Gospel Mission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452879925
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Orlando, FL, USA
Phone
7737661228
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$271,836
Expenses
$247,070
Assets
$463,520
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Narcis D Popovici (President)
  • Fabian Grech (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Narcis D Popovici (President): $90,000 total reported compensation
  • Elizabeth Gonzalez (Sec/Treasurer): $12,600 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Kingdom Gospel Mission is a Christian church related missionary organization. Our focus is and has been Christian education, outreach, starting churches and relief oriented work mostly overseas, and especially where we are currently based in Kurdistan, Iraq. With the volatility of the region and the recent crisis in the northern part of Iraq, where we are ministering, we find that the need for our organization to both strengthen the local church as well as provide a variety of sorts of aid to many who have fled for safety has increased dramatically.

What it reported doing in 2024

Kingdom Gospel Missions program services included providing Christian education, outreach, and relief to the Kurdistan, Iraq area where we are currently based.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 67
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 42.3%; rating input score 42; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.6% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $205K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.