Lutheran World Relief

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
132574963
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
2028886200
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,718,541
Expenses
$49,735,714
Assets
$157,305,358
Liabilities
$54,835,962

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL SPECKHARD (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ANDREA WILSON (VICE PRESIDENT, LEGAL AND COMPLIANCE)
  • EDWARD BYRD (VICE PRESIDENT GLOBAL RELATIONSHIPS RESOURCES)
  • JEREMY BAUMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GROUND UP INVESTING)
  • TIMOTHY MCCULLY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL SPECKHARD (PRESIDENT & CEO): $602,578 total reported compensation
  • MAHMOUD BAH (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $424,094 total reported compensation
  • PAUL AUXILA (MANAGING DIRECTOR/IHSD COP): $379,843 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lutheran World Relief (LWR) works with Lutherans and partners around the world to end poverty, injustice, and human suffering. We provide aid in emergencies and help families restore their lives. We partner with communities to build and grow rural economies. We break the cycle of poverty, so families and communities can thrive. Our goal is to help people build self‐sufficiency and create new community‐owned approaches to problem‐solving that will last long after our projects end. Our Mission. Founded by Lutherans in the United States at the end of World War II, grounded in Lutheran theology and building on decades of experience, Lutheran World Relief tackles global poverty by helping people adapt to the challenges that threaten their livelihoods and well-being. We work with people based on need, regardless of race, religion or nationality and we do not evangelize. We provide aid in...

What it reported doing in 2024

Food security/agriculture: lutheran world relief works with poor, rural communities around the world to help farmers improve their crops, learn new techniques and tools to increase their yield and attract buyers who will pay more for their products, help rural communities develop productive, resilient and stable economies through an enterprise-based approach that engages the private sector at multiple levels to create profitable partnerships that benefit families and promote rural livelihoods. Lutheran world relief also helps communities protect their agricultural assets in the face of challenging climate conditions and improve their resilience to natural hazards like floods and droughts. We introduced environmentally sustainable farming practices so that communities get the most out of their land while conserving and restoring their natural resources. We also worked with local and national governments to facilitate the protection of natural resources, helping communities assess their vulnerabilities to natural hazards and develop the plans and skills they need to prepare for them.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.7%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.16; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported · 0 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $38.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $603K · 28 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.