Shores of Grace Ministries
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273022828
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Plano, TX, USA
- Phone
- 6156476274
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $975,811
- Expenses
- $1,014,470
- Assets
- $368,187
- Liabilities
- $12,186
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- NICHOLAS BILLMAN (DIRECTOR/PRE): $81,809 total reported compensation
- MARGARET BILLMAN (DIRECTOR/TRE): $36,000 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 love god with our whole selves, and by his love, to rescue and restore individuals and families who have been wounded by prostitution, abuse, abandonment and poverty in recife, brazil, philadelphia pa and in the world.
What it reported doing in 2025
Shores of grace brazil spreads the gospel of jesus christ using the rescue home where worship nights, schools, business meetings, etc. Occur. Support of shores of grace brazil reamins our biggest output. They have actively been using the rescue home they now own; the base (where all functions such as worship nights, schools, business meetings, etc) occur has been renovated and is in use consistently. Street church, street ministry, slum outreaches, schools and worship nights occur on a regular basis. In 2025, 300 individuals were helped with food, water, and basic household needs. A new rescue home for infants and special needs children was delayed to 2026 due to brazilian "red tape." shores of grace ministry supplements income received from brazilian churches and individuals to fund all these ministries through shores of grace brazil.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 80
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.3%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $27.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 95.9%; rating input score 96; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.3% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $898K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.