Muslims for Muslims International
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 332366923
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Kingston, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8455753942
- Rating
- 38
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Religion Related N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Islam
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $218
- Expenses
- $36
- Assets
- $682
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN T PINNA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- JOHN T PINNA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MUSTAFA AKHWAND (BOARD MEMBER)
- MOMIN SHEIKH (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Muslims for Muslims International (M4M) seeks to advance the mission and key strategies the 2004 Amman Message envisages by: reconvening the Amman Conference, operationalizing the Amman Message, and responsibly advocating on behalf of the Muslim community. Key to this effort is M4M’s encouraging the ancient Islamic tradition of open public discourse free of consequence, backlash, and fear.
What it reported doing in 2025
Support the global unmah and religious minorities through the core pillars of engagement, media, and technology development and scholarship.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 88
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 83.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.94; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -188.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 6 affiliation controls reported
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.