At Ease USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461555291
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4023414807
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$740,020
Expenses
$839,318
Assets
$397,531
Liabilities
$33,601

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BETH KRAMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • PATRICK MCMAHON (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEX BAKKE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GAIL WILLIAMS (CLINICAL DIRECTOR): $130,003 total reported compensation
  • BETH KRAMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At ease USA (aeu) is committed to providing access to confidential trauma treatment and therapeutic support to active military, veterans and their loved ones, regardless of ability to pay. Aeu complements existing services offered by military and veterans organizations, with a focus on the elimination of barriers to treatment for those suffering from the effects of deployment and the uncertainty of war.

What it reported doing in 2025

Raise awareness and provide active us military, veterans, their families, and their loved ones access to providers who treat post-traumatic stress disorders and other related syndromes and disorders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.5%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.5% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $648K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.