Bafb Cold War Museum
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 834267639
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Blytheville, AR, USA
- Phone
- 8705322100
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Museum, Museum Activities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $470,615
- Expenses
- $963,809
- Assets
- $3,569,515
- Liabilities
- $1,511
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- BARRETT HARRISON (VICE-CHAIRMA)
- MICHAEL JACQUES (TREASURER)
- CHRISTIAN F OSTERMANN PHD (EXECUTIVE DI)
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
The national cold war museum is a non-profit organization that, inspired by the setting of a retired u.s. Air force base, shares the importance of the cold war--a unique superpower rivalry that prevailed between the u.s. And soviet union from the end of world war ii until the collapse of the U.S.s.r.--exploring it s military strategy, its impact on the country and its effect on world relations. As a destination for the region, the nation and the world, the museum expands understanding through the innovative presentation of facts, captivating experiences and tours of original u.s. Air force facilities. The national cold war museum, located on eaker air force base, will be recognized as a major tourist attraction in Arkansas that will provide an immersive and authoritative experience in informing, interpreting and honoring the legacy of the cold war.
What it reported doing in 2025
The national cold war museum is a non-profit organization that, inspired by the setting of a retired us.s. Air force base, shares the importance of the cold war--a unique superpower rivalry that prevailed between the us. And soviet union from the end of world war ii until the collapse of the U.S.s.r.--exploring its military stategy, its impact on the country and its effect on world relations. As a destination for the region, the nation and the world, the museum expands understanding through the innovative presentation of facts, captivating experiencxes and tours of original u.s. Air force facilities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
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: 13
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 19.7%; rating input score 20
- Program expense ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 5
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: -104.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.7; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 35.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 19.7% of revenue deployed · 5.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $51K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 20/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.