Mission Support Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203729799
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Mission Viejo, CA, USA
Phone
9493785577
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$175,984
Expenses
$191,658
Assets
$3,159
Liabilities
$29,465

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cathryn Greer (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Cathryn Greer (President): $36,092 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

MSN primarily supports missionaries in Africa and the U.S. We support child education & school construction in Africa. We provide African famine relief. We support those who plant new churches domestically and abroad. We equip church leaders around the world with training for ministry, and we support orphans, widows, survivors, and indigents.

What it reported doing in 2024

As a primarily mission organization, MSN helped 19 missionaries this year fulfill their calling to train, evangelize, reach those trapped in poverty, and assist refugees in war-torn countries. MSN provides prayer, counseling, training, and housing costs. Some of our missionaries live and serve in extraordinary circumstances. For example, this year one of our missionaries provided food, clothing, and other assistance to refugees in a drought-striken area of Kenya. Two others offered counseling and training for women and helped raise additional funds to support the poor. Another missionary assisted in establishing a widows support program. Others developed devotional materials to equip and encourage women in their faith. Our supported missionaries do incredible things in the U.S. and abroad because of our support.

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 55% for direct work, and 45% 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 44
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.9%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 9.33; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $185K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.