Village Missions
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 436043847
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2020
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- Dallas, OR, US
- Phone
- 503.623.4107
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,833,787
- Expenses
- $7,391,847
- Assets
- $5,481,807
- Liabilities
- $4,544,910
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- John Adams (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- John Adams (Executive Director): $102,455 total reported compensation
- James Cross (CFO): $98,001 total reported compensation
- Jonathan Hansen (Assistant Director): $95,397 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Village Missions is committed to helping country churches not only survive, but thrive; since 1948, it has been helping country churches thrive all across North America by placing pastors in rural churches and helping those churches get back on their feet. Team Updates / June 28, 2026 I’m happy to see kids grow on their journey of faith in Christ. Read More. Team Updates / June 28, 2026 The VBS curriculum has challenged me to think about the significance of being one of God’s sheep. Team Updates / June 27, 2026 Have childlike faith, trust God to guide your course, and be willing to step into whatever He has for you. Team Updates / June 27, 2026 I am so thankful for an opportunity to share about Christians in my home culture.
What it reported doing in 2020
Christianity Programs: Candidate School. Village Missions conducts orientation classes to screen and train prospective Village Missionaries. This is the final step in a rigorous screening process where the the call of candidates to the ministry is validated and their final acceptance is determined. We hold Candidate School in the Spring and Fall of each year. This week-long event gives potential missionary-pastors a good look at Village Missions: our history, policies, mission, and vision. At the same time, we get to know the candidates. The candidates are trained for rural ministry and spend time in prayer together. They get to know the International Service Center staff. At the end of the week, the candidates hold a service where they share their testimonies and Executive Director John Adams gives a short message. The public is invited to this service. As part of our continuing efforts to find new Village Missionaries to bring to Candidate School and send to fields who are waiting for leadership, we take special time to pray each month. To join in with us, visit our RIPE page https://villagemissions.org/ripe/.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $22.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 79.5%; rating input score 79; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $6.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $102K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.