Clark County Veterans Assistance Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273077905
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
Phone
3606937030
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,424,675
Expenses
$1,378,591
Assets
$740,565
Liabilities
$15,204

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDY RUSSEL (PRESIDENT)
  • SONJA WOOD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARON TYRE (CHAIR): $81,299 total reported compensation
  • SONJA WOOD (VICE PRESIDENT): $54,730 total reported compensation
  • JUDY RUSSEL (PRESIDENT): $49,762 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The clark county veterans assistance centers (ccvac) mission is to provide a welcoming and safe environment with the goal of assisting veterans and their families in obtaining benefits, services and resources to meet their basic needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides financial aid through the veteran's assistance fund for eligible veterans and through funds raised by the center for veterans that fall outside of the fund eligibility criteria. The organization assists with filing va disabilities claims or accessing va benefits. The organization provides clothing, food, hygiene items, outdoor equipment (backpack, sleeping bag, flashlight, etc.) in addition, the organization provides assistance in locating employment, housing, medical and dental care, and more.

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 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.