Worldwide Marriage Encounter
Legal name: Worldwide Marriage Encounter Nas
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 352536762
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Moreno Valley, CA, United States
- Phone
- +1 (909) 332-7309
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Roman Catholic
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $674,150
- Expenses
- $594,247
- Assets
- $2,181,997
- Liabilities
- $68,468
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANTHONY MORRIS (PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN MORRIS (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ANTHONY MORRIS (PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN MORRIS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- BISHOP MICHAEL WARFEL (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to proclaim the value of marriage and holy orders in the Church and in the world. Fr. Chuck Gallagher, S.J., a youth retreat master, attended a weekend in New Jersey, USA, in 1968, and his dream to change the world began taking shape. The next year a National Executive Board for “Marriage Encounter Weekends” was formed in the United States, maintaining ties with Christian Family Movements (CFM). Guidelines were developed to coordinate the expansion of the movement in the United States and Canada. Gallagher – drawing from the spiritual exercises of St. Ignatius – proposed the first outline for Marriage Encounter weekends. His vision was for a Roman Catholic movement with emphasis on sharing feelings, daily dialogue, and continued community support. The original movemen.
What it reported doing in 2024
Facilitate weekend experiences during which couples may create a dialogue with each other and with god to create a higher and broader understanding of what it means to be married.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 98.8%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 11.9%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.67; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 98.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $587K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.