Search and Examine

Lists Explanation
Ministry Tables
Find out More about our Rating system

Ministry Financial Efficiency Ratings Calculator

Select a ministry to see how it's ratings are calculated:

5 Star Financial Efficiency Ratings Calculation for Christian Relief Services Charities

The overall rating is a summarization of the financial efficiency rating system’s three efficiency area assessments. The three efficiency areas are:

Fund Acquisition: StarStar
Resource Allocation: StarStarStarStar
Asset Utilization:Star
Together, these form the overall star rating:StarStar

First step, we identify where the data is coming from:

  • There are 334 ministries being rated in the database
  • The latest year of information for Christian Relief Services Charities is 2011, of which the calculations are made.

Second step, we collect the key information used to make ratio's in our calculation.

For numerators, we use:
  • Fundraising Cost: $3,953,000. How much money is being spent raising money?
  • Public Contributions: $24,460,000. How much money is donated?
  • Total Expense: $41,632,000. How much money is spent in total?
  • Program Expense: $36,159,000. How much money is being spent specifically on the Ministry's program functions?
  • Total Assets: $98,835,000. How much net value does the ministry have?
For denominators, we use:
  • Total Revenue: $46,752,000
  • Total Current Assets: $20,395,000

Third step, we combine the above numbers into fractions called ratios

Ratio involved Division principle Division Calculated Ratio Effect on 5 star rating What the ratio answers
Fund Acquisition Efficiency Ratios:
Fundraising Cost Ratio Fundraising Costs / Total Revenue $3,953,000 / $46,752,000 0.085 Less is better. Is a large share of donor dollars being spent on fundraising?
Contribution Reliance Ratio Public Contribution / Total Revenue $24,460,000 / $46,752,000 0.523 More is better Does the ministry rely much on donations, or is a lot of money attained through other means?
Resource Allocation Efficiency Ratios:
Spending Ratio (Total Expense / Total Revenue) $41,632,000 / $46,752,000 0.89 Less is better. Are they spending too much for what they get?
Program Output Ratio Program Expense / Total Revenue $36,159,000 / $46,752,000 0.773 More is better Is more money being spent on the ministry's progam, rather than other expenses (ex. management, fundraising)?
Asset Utilization Efficiency Ratios:
Degree of Long-term Investment (Total Assets / Total Current Assets) $98,835,000 / $20,395,000 4.846 Less is better. Is a lot being stored away for later use?
Current Assets Turnover Ratio (Total Expense / Total Current Assets) $41,632,000 / $20,395,000 2.041 More is better Is much of what the Ministry has being used?

Fourth Step, get the database average so we can compare the two

Ratio Average This Ministry Effect on Star Rating Score
Fundraising Costs Ratio: 0.052 0.085 Less is better
Contribution Reliance Ratio: 0.935 0.523 More is better
Spending Ratio: 0.988 0.89 Less is better
Program Output Ratio: 0.805 0.773 More is better
Degree of Long-term Investment: 1.709 4.846 Less is better
Current Assets Turnover Ratio: 3.267 2.041 More is better

Fifth Step, Divide ministry ratio by average to calculate score

Ratio Score Ministry / Average Ratio Score Effect on Star Rating Score
Fundraising Costs Ratio: 0.085 / 0.052 1.63 Less is better
Contribution Reliance Ratio: 0.523 / 0.935 0.56 More is better
Spending Ratio: 0.89 / 0.988 0.9 Less is better
Program Output Ratio: 0.773 / 0.805 0.96 More is better
Degree of Long-term Investment: 4.846 / 1.709 2.84 Less is better
Current Assets Turnover Ratio: 2.041 / 3.267 0.62 More is better

Sixth Step, Calculate efficiency scores by netting the ratio scores

Efficiency Score Type (Positive Score - Negative Score) Efficiency Score Effect on Star Rating Score
Fund Acquisition Efficiency Score: (Fundraising Costs Ratio - Contribution Reliance Ratio) -1.07 More is better
Resource Allocation Efficiency Score: (Program Output Ratio Score ? Spending Ratio Score) 0.06 More is better
Asset Utilization Efficiency Score: (Current Asset Turnover Score ? Degree of Long-term Ratio Score) -2.22 More is better

Seventh Step, rank the score on a scale of 1 - 334

Fund Acquisition Efficiency Rank: 274 of 334
Resource Allocation Efficiency Rank: 106 of 334
Asset Utilization Efficiency Rank: 308 of 334

Eighth Step, convert the rank into the percentile (percentage rank)

This puts the ministry on a scale from 0% to 100% where 100% is the top.
To calculate this, we follow the formaula (Total Population - Rank) / (Total Population - 1)
Fund Acquisition Efficiency 18%
Resource Allocation Efficiency 68.5%
Asset Utilization Efficiency 7.8%

Ninth Step, 5 stars according to each category

Assign the three Individual 5 Star Ratings using the following table:
Percentile Range Resulting stars
00.0% - 10.0% 1 Star
10.0% - 32.5% 2 Star
32.5% - 67.5% 3 Star
67.5% - 90.0% 4 Star
90.0% - 100.0% 5 Star
This translates to:
Fund Acquisition Efficiency StarStar
Resource Allocation Efficiency StarStarStarStar
Asset Utilization Efficiency Star
Here we have the three different star ratings. The rest of this procedure will use those the three categories to come up with the overall rating.

Tenth Step, find average percentage

Average the above percentages in step 8 to get the overall percentage: 31.4%

Eleventh Step, rank percentages out of the total of 334

The overall rank is: 257 of 334

Twelfth Step, Overall percentile (percentage rank), just like Step 8

Calculate overall percent rank using it's rank as found from the above step and the following formula:
(Total Population - Rank of individual) / (Total Population - 1) = 23.1%

Thirteenth Step, 5 star rating placement

The final task is to match 23.1% percentile into the chart below.
Percentile Range Resulting stars
00.0% - 10.0% 1 Star
10.0% - 32.5% 2 Star
32.5% - 67.5% 3 Star
67.5% - 90.0% 4 Star
90.0% - 100.0% 5 Star

This translates to the resulting overall 5 star rating: StarStar

Calculations disclaimer: The numbers shown in the this website example are sometimes rounded off before they are calculated, as a long string of digits is distracting for many users. This may make the calculation appear imprecise. For the purpose of understanding the calculations the difference is negligible. However, the actual calculations used in the database are precise.