Lutheran Inner-City Network Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760683235
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,110,839
Expenses
$1,126,577
Assets
$3,287,771
Liabilities
$760,839

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Junkans (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mark Junkans (Executive Director): $105,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

In response to God's directive to make disciples of all nations, LINC-Houston's mission is to plant, nuture and equip groups of new believers among our culturally unique communities.

What it reported doing in 2014

Mission support, education and leadership development. LINC-Houston creates ethnic missions and ministries in urban Houston by training and educating pastors, congregations, and laymen and funding the start up of mission congregations in Houston. LINC provided theological/seminary training, workship training and hands-on training. LINC organized congregational training and development seminars, youth mission trips, and a chaplaincy program at a hospital. LINC supported start up congregations in Hispanic ministries, African ministries, Asian/Indian ministries, at various homes and centers throughout Houston and trained, developed, and supported their pastors and leaders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $229.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.92; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -46.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 70.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $798K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.