Engineering Ministries International USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742213629
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7196332078
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,721,479
Expenses
$7,453,721
Assets
$17,650,265
Liabilities
$7,510,494

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN DALLMANN (CEO / BOARD MEMBER)
  • HENRY WATTS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN DALLMANN (CEO / BOARD MEMBER)
  • HENRY WATTS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BRIAN BEAIRD (BOARD CHAIR)

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

The mission of engineering ministries international USA (emi) is to develop people, design structures, and construct facilities which serve communities and the church. Emi's vision is: people restored by god and the world restored through design.

What it reported doing in 2024

Emi USA continued to provide architectural and engineering services for christian ministry clients in countries around the world as well as some work within the united states. Emi USA led teams of volunteers to uganda, malawi, kenya, senegal, chad, and ethiopia as well as to Texas, Florida, and Nebraska. These christian ministries operate mission hospitals, camps, community service and schools. In addition, emi USA provided remote assistance (no international travel) to projects in haiti and burundi. In other areas, emi USA performed technical support to respond to natural and man-made disasters in turkey, kenya, myanmar, and the caribbean. (continued on schedule. O)emi USA was also heavily engaged throughout 2025 in a large multi-year water, sanitation and hygiene (wash) program in remote villages of Alaska, which began in early 2021 and will be completed at the end of 2026.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -10.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.