Partners in Compassionate Care Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201224185
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
6163562464
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$127,874
Expenses
$82,180
Assets
$414,909
Liabilities
$2,119

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STUART BOWMAN (CHAIRPERSON)
  • BEVERLY JANSMA (SECRETARY)
  • KIM RANTALA (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide christ-centered education programs; quality, compassionate, and affordable health care services; engage in sustainable economic development programs; give disaster relief assistance to victims; and to partner in activities designed to accomplish the above objectives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Partners in compassionate care (pcc) continued providing christ-centered healthcare, education, and discipleship services to vulnerable populations in south sudan. During the year, pcc focused on re-establishing medical services following the relocation of its clinical assets to the nile orphan care (noc) campus near juba. Medical and construction equipment previously shipped to south sudan was positioned for use, and pcc conducted planning and site preparation activities in support of a future combined medical and eye clinic. Pcc also supported preventive healthcare through the noc school clinic, serving resident children, and continued its christ-centered education and discipleship programs in partnership with nile orphan care. These programs provided access to daily meals, basic health support, biblical instruction, and a safe learning environment, addressing essential physical, educational, and spiritual needs of orphaned and vulnerable children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.7%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.05; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $66K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.