Tree Ministries

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842038421
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Spokane, WA, USA
Phone
5098795412
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$437,713
Expenses
$431,573
Assets
$292,177
Liabilities
$14,550

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lee Kisman (President)
  • Andrew Kisman (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Lee Kisman (President)
  • Laurel Kisman (Treasurer)
  • Andrew Kisman (Vice President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Tree Ministries is to serve the people of Guatemala with Christian teaching and works of benevolence. Activities performed during 2024 that further our purpose of promoting and exemplifying the Christian faith through Word and Deed included; facilitating mission work teams from the United States to share the Gospel teach Bible classes and presentations distribute Bibles build houses distribute water filters and distribute food. Tree Ministries also conducts Bible seminars marriage retreats leadership workshops and personal counseling and encouragement for Christian ministers missionaries and workers throughout Guatemala.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tree Ministries distributed approximately 97 Bibles distributed 100 water filters distributed more than 93 food bags to individual families built 10 homes 4 kitchens and 3 bathrooms provided assistance discipleship and training to 15 ministry partners servicing more than 1500 children and 680 families helped with financial assistance for medical services and medication throughout the region.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.8%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 55.6%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 75%; rating input score 75; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 65.4%; rating input score 65; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 1.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.8% of revenue deployed · 55.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $202K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 37 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ForeignGrants column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.