The Principle Foundation
Legal name: National Fund for Christian Science Nursing
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 831100674
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Overland Park, KS, United States
- Phone
- 816-561-5955
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $795,548
- Expenses
- $11,037,133
- Assets
- $6,916,821
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRUCE JEFFREY (PRESIDENT)
- GINA LINDQUIST-BAILEY (PRESIDENT (START 11/1/25))
Highest reported compensation
- BRUCE JEFFREY (PRESIDENT): $177,970 total reported compensation
- SHANNON HORST (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $131,461 total reported compensation
- KEVIN MASSEY (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $120,250 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
God cares for us all. This fundamental truth is the basis of the work of The Principle Foundation. In caring for each other, we reflect to some small degree God’s care for us. Primarily, we provide financial assistance to students of Christian Science who, based on their income and assets, cannot afford to pay for an immediate need.
What it reported doing in 2025
The national fund for christian science nursing: to gather, bless, and offer resources that support the healing ministry of christian science nursing. The national fund for christian science nursing offers grants to individuals to help pay for christian science nursing care.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 47
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1,287.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1M reported
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.