Dignity for the Amputee International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843558157
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Minnetonka, MN, USA
Phone
6179606095
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$483,141
Expenses
$466,131
Assets
$99,313
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW COLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • GREGORY EKBOM (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW COLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • GREGORY EKBOM (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID SCHMITT (DIRECTOR, EDUCATION & TRAINING)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nonprofit christian organization that aims to enhance the dignity of amputees in areas of need and unrest.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ukraine -war in ukraine since 2014 has caused a vast amount of both military personnel and civilians to have been injured and lose limbs. It is estimated currently that 100,000+ people need a prosthetic device so they will have the ability to walk again. That number grows daily. Limbfit has partnered with a ukrainian organization called maximum to help address this need. Working together, we have built a brand-new prosthetic lab and clinic in the city of zolotonosha where maximum is located. With this new facility, we care for and treat those in need of a prosthetic device-one patient at a time. In addition to maximum, we have developed a partnership with cherkasy medical hospital because we assessed the need to educate and train surgeons in advanced surgical techniques. This helped us develop the medical education & training division of limbfit. Since 2023 we have held multiple conferences led by top doctors from the us both in person and virtually to advance surgeons and medical professionals in the care and treatment they provide to those that have been injured from the current war situation. We continue to push for this advancement. For 2026, we are planning to bring surgeons at the top of their field to help educate and train surgeons in the operating room.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.1%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 58.2%; rating input score 58; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 36.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.1% of revenue deployed · 66.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $309K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.