Vision Beyond Borders

Legal name: Vision Beyond Borders Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830313191
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Casper, WY, United States
Phone
307.333.6545
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,470,292
Expenses
$1,735,876
Assets
$2,425,993
Liabilities
$276,340

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN CARLTON (PRESIDENT)
  • DAN GROVER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK KLEIN (BOARD CHAIREXEC DIRECTOR): $99,126 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To preach the Gospel to all people (evangelization). All gifts to Vision Beyond Borders, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowed by law.****Vision Beyond Borders is a member of the ECFA, Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. Contributions are solicited with the understanding that Vision Beyond Borders has complete discretion and control over the use of all donated funds. Vision Beyond Borders will attempt to honor gifts preference to support particular ministries, but the final decision on the use of all funds rests with the organization. CONTACT US.

What it reported doing in 2025

Served over twenty countries and distributed Bibles and books to Christians in foreign countries. Supported children, pastors, and individuals through childrens & womens homes, and individual sponsorship. Delivered humanitarian relief in the form of household goods, personal hygiene, clothing, and other humanitarian items.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.7%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $76.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 29.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 54.7% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.