Paul Tripp Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830461061
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Coopersburg, PA, USA
Phone
2153384000
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,858,768
Expenses
$2,781,143
Assets
$1,871,647
Liabilities
$190,001

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Steven Sarkisian (Vice President)
  • Paul Tripp (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Benjamin Fallon (Executive Dir.): $197,167 total reported compensation
  • Steven Sarkisian (Vice President): $185,696 total reported compensation
  • Paul Tripp (President): $169,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Paul tripp ministries, inc. Provides paul with the administrative support and structure that enables him to produce resources, and travel around the world teaching. By god's grace and with donor support, we have reached millions of people worldwide.

What it reported doing in 2025

Connecting the transforming power of jesus christ to everyday life by providing training seminars and workshops and counseling sessions for individuals, couples, and groups in church leadership positions from all around the world. Around the world initiative seeks to support individuals and pastors from around the world who need counseling and wisdom to address complex pastoral issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 2.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.6% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $197K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.