Sword & Shovel

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932631741
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Palos Verdes Estates, CA, USA
Phone
3106979190
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$256,432
Expenses
$162,001
Assets
$277,535
Liabilities
$495

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS CANNON (PRESIDENT/EX)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS CANNON (PRESIDENT/EX): $86,120 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are committed to equipping men and supporting the local church with the tools for spiritual growth and life transformation through critical care, coaching, and christ centered community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Individual critical care: if youre a man facing a crisis, were here to listen and support you. Our critical care program is designed to walk with you through this difficult season, aligning the recovery process with the guidance and support of your local church. Church critical care - sword & shovel offers specialized care to help navigate these challenging situations while allowing your church to remain focused on its spiritual mission.coaching - sword & shovel offers personalized life and ministry coaching tailored to your unique challenges. Whether you're a man navigating significant changes at home or work, or a pastor seeking guidance on leadership or growth, we are here to support you.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $189.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 48.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 54.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $134K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.