Relevance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061778735
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Corvallis, OR, USA
Phone
5412073220
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$353,829
Expenses
$309,005
Assets
$1,656,944
Liabilities
$419,262

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL KING (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEMIMA GEISERT (DIRECTOR): $49,566 total reported compensation
  • LISA IVERSON (CHEF): $30,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To produce, promote, distribute and exhibit the relevance of the triune god to all people and disciple leaders to do the same. Operate a residence and discipleship program for local college students. Thousands from the campus are impacted in knowing christ or following him in a stronger christian walk by means of teaching, concerts, events and partnerships with other christian groups. Relevance is not affiliated with anyone denomination, but it's mission is to work with all evangelical churches.

What it reported doing in 2025

Relevance owns and operates the courtyard in corvallis Oregon near Oregon state university. The purpose of the courtyard is to provide an encouraging and economical living situation where up to 48 christian collegiate men and women can be built up in their relationship with jesus christ and with one another. Courtyard residents are expected to participate in community service each school term and walk in a manner that is modeled by christ and the entire word of god. Relevance also provides discipleship and service opportunities by offering space to other organizations for concerts movies and events. Encouraging missions both domestically and abroad and outreach locally is always a part of the program. Informal bible studies and study groups met at the courtyard through the year. We are focused on welcoming and building relationships with international students via conveersation corner game nights meals activities and one-on-one assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $399.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.36; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.