American Veterans (Amvet Post #7)

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450358382
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fargo, ND, USA
Phone
7012350426
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$284,824
Expenses
$229,171
Assets
$425,334
Liabilities
$23,450

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STEVE LEEDAHL (COMMANDER)
  • SCOTT BRESSON (DIRECTOR)
  • DANIEL MONTANA (ADJUTANT)

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

Veterans fraternal organization

What it reported doing in 2024

Support of american veterans

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.9%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 22%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 14.6%; rating input score 15; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 19.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.86; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.9% of revenue deployed · 22% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.