Manna Global Ministries

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651158805
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Cookeville, TN, USA
Phone
5612990484
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$941,761
Expenses
$933,107
Assets
$470,593
Liabilities
$13,186

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chad Mynatt (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chad Mynatt (President): $48,570 total reported compensation
  • Jill Mynatt (Admin Director): $34,167 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Serving the dominican republic (dr) and the city of cookeville, Tennessee (ckvl). The ministry's main focus is to provide mentoring and discipleship resources to those involved.

What it reported doing in 2024

Efforts in cookevile began towards the end of 2018. The ministry is providing services to the local hispanic community via esl classes and other services. Plans are underway to open a community center for the hispanic community. We have further expanded mission sites in central america, largely focusing on costa rica and nicaragua. The cost rica site is focused on planting house churches. The nicaragua site also is focused on house churches as well as children's and sports ministries. Additionally, the work in cookeville branched off and started a separate non-profit to house our hispanic community center called el puente. Additionally, cookeville houses the manna global office

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 66.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $622K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.