International Disaster Emergency Service Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237348277
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Noblesville, IN, USA
Phone
3177734111
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,476,655
Expenses
$9,152,482
Assets
$14,525,041
Liabilities
$557,793

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID STINE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID STINE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $189,097 total reported compensation
  • RITA CAMDEN (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $146,699 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

International disaster emergency service, inc. Exists to meet physical and spiritual needs of suffering people throughout the world in the name of jesus christ by funding relief operations for disaster, hunger, medical needs, and developmental projects.

What it reported doing in 2025

Discipleship projects- every project ides undertakes creates opportunities for discipleship as christ's love is shown to those who are helped. Some projects are focused specifically on discipleship (such as bible distribution and church planting).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Pass
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $4.1M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • 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.