Teen Mania Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731284606
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Brentwood, TN, USA
Phone
9033248000
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,789,976
Expenses
$14,821,932
Assets
$6,618,576
Liabilities
$11,815,726

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provoke a young generation to passionately pursue Jesus Christ and to take His life-giving message to the ends of the earth.

What it reported doing in 2012

Domestic Evangelism: Teen Mania Ministries primarily promotes its global mission of world evangelism through its domestic outreach program: Acquire The Fire conference events. In 2013, 116,135 individuals participated in Acquire The Fire's 30 fall and spring events- Epic Truth and Relentless Pursuit, respectively- throughout North America. Concurrent with the youth events, Acquire The Fall breakout sessions met the needs of 11,277 youth ministers and 12,805 parents. Acquire The Fire events in 2013 saw 11,427 people make decisions to live for Christ and were encouraged to connect with a local church for spiritual growth and discipleship. Teen Mania Ministries Center for Creative Media also produced its first motion picture, Surge, which played in 500 theatres. The film's 2 million impressions resulted in 1,195 people texting that they prayed to give their lives to Christ; 2,557 committing to go on a missions trip; and 314,000 following the center online.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 48
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.79; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2009 to 2012
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.