Captain Erick Foster Memorial Ride

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473192875
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2678254617
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$529,637
Expenses
$646,208
Assets
$226,359
Liabilities
$17,780

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NICHOLAS LIERMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NICHOLAS LIERMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $82,548 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Team foster raises money to partner service dogs with tri-state area veterans suffering from combat-related disabilities, including post-traumatic stress disorder (ptsd) and traumatic brain injury (tbi). See schedule o for continuation. We ensure these dogs are obtained, cared for, and provided special training at no cost to veterans.

What it reported doing in 2024

Team foster covered the costs for three organizations to provide specialized service training. After an approximately 2-year program, the dogs are paired with tri-state area veterans suffering from combat-related disabilities, including post-traumatic stress diorder (ptsd) and traumatic brain injury (tbi). The funds raised and provided to these training facilities are to ensure that the dogs receive the appropriate specialized training at no cost to the veteran. Team foster also covered vetenarian expenses for dogs to further the mission of providing continual care to service dogs at no cost to the veteran.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 77% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd 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: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 51st 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.9% of revenue deployed · 66.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $428K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.