The Reckoning International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562454660
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Sugarcreek, OH, USA
Phone
(330) 763-1199
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$494,092
Expenses
$472,868
Assets
$362,890
Liabilities
$7,577

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIM TROYER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TIM TROYER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $45,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Reckoning International (TRI) combines faith with action for holistic, gospel-centered transformation in underdeveloped countries.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization operates and funds livelihood development programs. The key to overcoming poverty in the third world is empowering people to develop their own gifts and skill-sets so they can build a livelihood and to coach them in business management so they can thrive and bless others in need. This year the organization continued support for orphaned children in uganda. The organization invested in several workshops for micro businesses and skills training. Please see our website for personal stories and ways you can get involved at www.thereckoning.org.

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 64% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $97.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 4.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.6% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $374K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.