Ravi Zacharias International Ministries

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133200719
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Norcross, GA, USA
Phone
7704496766
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,742,588
Expenses
$22,904,996
Assets
$12,439,416
Liabilities
$2,040,591

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ravi K Zacharias (Chairman and CEO)
  • Sarah Davis (Director / Executive Director)
  • Robert Grinnell (Vice President, Development)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ravi K Zacharias (Chairman and CEO): $365,315 total reported compensation
  • Robert Grinnell (Vice President, Development): $222,632 total reported compensation
  • Sarah Davis (Director / Executive Director): $216,037 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary mission of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries is to support, expand, and enhance the preaching, teaching, and vision of Dr. Ravi K. Zacharias. Distinctive in its strong evangelistic and apologetic foundation, it is intended to touch both the heart and the intellect of the thinkers and opinion-makers of society and to reach and challenge those who shape the ideas of a culture with the credibility of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

What it reported doing in 2014

International Outreach: Established in Canada, The United Kingdom, India, Singapore, and Hong Kong. The Ministry helps to financially support all of these independent entities (except for Canada). The annual grant amounts for each of the affiliates are proposed in the initial budget draft for each fiscal year and approved by the Board of Directors. Each of the affiliates submits budgets and reports on how the funds are being spent. In addition, management personnel from the U.S. Headquarters makes periodic visits to the regions for audit and oversight purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.1%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.2%; rating input score 84; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.1% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $18.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $365K · 26 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 47 of 48 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.