Loading…
Loading…
North Carolina · Nonprofit
MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC (North Carolina) is funded by 6 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $169,804 in grants to it, the largest being W ARMSTRONG & PRISCILLA B SMITH FOUNDA ($90,000). 4 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC is better cushioned than half of the 2,233 religion nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 2,233 religion nonprofits $1M–$10M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
99% of MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (90% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
$10k from 1 funders in 2025, up from $22k and 2 in 2017.
4 of 6 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 40% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC leans on a few funders — its largest provides 53% of grant income and the top three 85%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 55% · 2018 60% · 2019 50% · 2020 60% · 2021 99% · 2022 43% · 2023 99% · 2024 54% · 2025 100% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
MISSIONARY AIR GROUP INC draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside North Carolina — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 4 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 6 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
76% of spending goes to programs.
99%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2017–2024), and the filings of 6funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing