True Impact Ministries

Legal name: True Impact Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453370792
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
Phone
3035980049
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$482,171
Expenses
$490,232
Assets
$153,073
Liabilities
$1,235

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW D STEWART (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AMY O'NEILL (SECRETARY)
  • ANDREW D STEWART (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF THOMAS (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

Of all donations go directly to the needs of the children we sponsor through supplies & infrastructure Change a Child’s Future. Transform a Community. Join us on our mission to give vulnerable and orphaned children of Uganda the home, education and support they need to become thriving pillars in their community and break cycles of poverty. Sponsor a Child Donate.

What it reported doing in 2025

Served orphans and vulnerable children in uganda by: 1) constructing a secondary school room at maranatha day and boarding school; 2) constructing a security wall at salem christian school; 3) furnishing clothing, medical supplies, medicine, toys, school supplies, sports equipment, and educational supplies, benefiting over 500 children; 4) providing ongoing financial support of 220 children; and 5) sending a team to visit and oversee mission interests in uganda.

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 63% 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: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $67.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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: 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: -1.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd 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: 96.9% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $467K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.