Mending the Soul Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412076122
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Wilsonville, OR, USA
Phone
8665355044
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Counseling, Support Groups

Reported finances

Revenue
$876,965
Expenses
$721,970
Assets
$341,334
Liabilities
$975

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN TRACY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN TRACY (PRESIDENT): $87,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To offer accessible, psychologically sound, christ-centered resources for healing abuse and trauma.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mending the soul creates christian abuse healing curriculum and trainings for both domestic and global use. This fiscal year, in collaboration with indigenous bible college, the organization released one of the first christian trauma healing workbooks for native americans, the mts native workbook, and completed sixteen new translations of healiing curriculum. Our staff and volunteers led over 23,000 people to christ. Our train the trainer model allows us to leverage influence in the majority world where we train pastors, parachurch, and community leaders who are also given skills to train others. We have reached over 550,000 people with trauma care in uganda and the democratic republic of the congo this fiscal year. Domestically we added 97 new facilitators, a 39% increase from the previous year.

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 65% for direct work, and 35% for 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.9%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $101.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.6%; rating input score 94; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.7%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.9% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $595K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.