MediSend College of Biomedical Engineering Technology
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752332074
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- (214) 217-2000
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,185,199
- Expenses
- $1,841,251
- Assets
- $4,504,664
- Liabilities
- $3,106,123
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NICHOLAS HALLACK (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- NICHOLAS HALLACK (PRESIDENT): $386,353 total reported compensation
- COSTEL RIZESCU (DIR. OF BIOMEDICAL TRAININ): $135,000 total reported compensation
- STEPHANIE PEDROZA (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $107,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide accessible, high-quality education in biomedical engineering technology to students from underserved communities, equipping them with the skills to succeed in the healthcare technology field.
What it reported doing in 2024
Medisend college of biomedical engineering technology provides high quality intensive education and training and opportunities for us veterans to elevate their lives and achieve financial security as well as meaningful service in the healthcare industry. In addition, medisend college offers comprehensive biomedical engineering technology programs to individuals from developing countries. They return to their homes to improve the overall healthcare in their hospitals and communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 71% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- 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. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 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: 15.7%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 71% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $386K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.