Impact Ministries USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800678702
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Duvall, WA, USA
Phone
6178555259
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$599,675
Expenses
$572,889
Assets
$360,523
Liabilities
$22,139

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LESLIE PETERS (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER BRANDENBURG (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LESLIE PETERS (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER BRANDENBURG (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA LANGEMANN (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Impact ministries USA's mission is to train guatemalans for leadership by teaching biblical principles in such a way that they become integrated in their lives and effect spiritual change in their society, and to impact north american christians for world missions. Impact ministries USA lives out its mission by building and operating the vida christian schools and medical clinic programs, facilitating a short-term mission team program, and supporting the growth and development of the rio de vida church program.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education program: imusa provided christ centered educational opportunities to approximately 180 students in addition to 14 full classes of students. Also, a small clinic staffed by north american and guatemalan medical personnel that is attached to one of the schools provided general medical care to students, improving student health and school attendance. And finally a feeding program integrated into the educational program served that same populations of students and classes, improving student health and ability to participate in educational outcomes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $75.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.4%; rating input score 88; 42nd 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $509K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.