Redeemed Lives Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223936990
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Ipswich, MA, USA
Phone
9783560404
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$119,863
Expenses
$136,154
Assets
$6,298
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mario Bergner (President)

People named in this filing

  • Mario Bergner (President)
  • Neil Hubacker (Treasurer)
  • Leslie McKinny Attema (Clerk)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To equip Church leaders to provide Christian pastoral care and discipleship for the cure and maturation of the soul. And to provide such care and discipleship to those who voluntarily seek and want such services. Between seminars and programs, we have served about 425 people.

What it reported doing in 2015

In 2015 we offered individualized personal pastoral care to Christian women and men overcoming unwanted passions and appetites. Gave one in the USA, taught two sections in Methods of Biblical Counseling at the University of the Nations campuses in Hawaii and Korea. RLI also provided humanitarian teaching at the Leweza Retreat and Conference Centre for the Anglican Church in Uganda, the Joy Centre for Leadership Training in Wakiso, also in Uganda. RLI also attended the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw, Poland as a registered NGO of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 4
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.2%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 4

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.2% of revenue deployed · 3.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 4/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.