Army and Navy Union of the USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340694458
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Bolivar, OH, USA
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$39,563
Expenses
$33,960
Assets
$43,252
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TIM GOWINS (SR VICE COMMANDER)
  • JOE LYTLE (TRUSTEE)
  • MARVIN RODOCKER (TRUSTEE)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To further the national organizations of veterans and to aid in fund raising various charitable grants and donations

What it reported doing in 2017

To further national organizations of vetrans and to aid in fundraising various charitable grants and donations

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.6%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 23.5%; rating input score 24
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.2%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.7% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.6% of revenue deployed · 23.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 19/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.