Sonrise International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453714422
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Owasso, OK, USA
Phone
9182725400
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$510,169
Expenses
$201,089
Assets
$360,456
Liabilities
$40,004

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES A CARROLL III (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES A CARROLL III (PRESIDENT): $15,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote worldwide discipleship for god

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024 charles a. Carroll iii made three trips to africa. In the first he visited cameroon and kenya. In the second he visited cote divoire. In the third, he traveled to central africa republic and cameroon, again. 2024 was a year of transition. In june we gathered all our key colleagues from central africa together in douala, along with the founder and director of world mission centre (wmc) and its east african director. The purpose of this meeting was to announce our resignation of overseeing the live school project in west and central africa and to announce the new ministry we were beginning in the same region. After that time, we selected 15 to go with us to nairobi to attend a disciple making movement seminar to immerse them in a completely different philosophy of mission and observe if any of them wanted to change paradigms of ministry to specifically focus on making disciples among the unreached, rather than working with the established church to raise up indigenous missionaries and the paradigm shift required to see the church as what it truly is, an organism of relationships rather than a corporate hierarchical structure. We came home and then two weeks later, i flew to abidjan, cote divoire to meet with as many of our west african colleagues as well as the wmc director and east african director to do the same. Only, we did not go to a dmm seminar, but rather had a dmm coach teach us all on what is and how to recognize a person of peace, who is the key to working in a new community. Already having planned two frontier mission academies (fma) for 2024 but knowing that a key principle of the new philosophy of ministry we were entering is just in time training, this year we made the fmas only one month long instead of three and spent half the time going through hand selected training we have done in fmas in years past and half of it introducing dmm, which we are now doing. In abidjan, we had the fma students students meet us in abidjan and spent one week with them there, after we made the announcement and presented our new vision to our existing team. When i flew home, they went up country to bondoukou to complete their training in and among the kulango people. About a month later, i flew to central africa republic for the start of the second fma and spent one week with them giving them a basic training in the dmm system we had now launched out into using. They then continued with their fma, and i flew to cameroon, where i went to ngaoundere and met with a group weve related to from across cameroon and across chad to give them a basic training in this revised ministry we are now doing. There were about 65 in our first meeting in douala, cameroon, about 50 in our meeting in abidjan, cote divoire, and about 65 in ngaoundere, cameroon.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - Revenue comfortably covers expenses and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.5%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.5% of revenue deployed · 62.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $125K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 25/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.