Foundation to Restore Accountability

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474488132
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9186414755
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Government and Public Administration

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,895
Expenses
$416,899
Assets
$12,713
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN EVERETT TREAT (PRESIDENT)
  • BRYAN BERKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRYAN BERKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $107,570 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation performs original research to examine federal spending and programs with an emphasis on documenting inefficiencies, program overlap, waste, fraud and abuse and the total costs of long term obligations of the federal government.

What it reported doing in 2020

We ran our third annual scholarship competition and awarded four scholarships to college students. The winners of the essay and video competitions won $1,000 scholarships while the runners-up in each category won $500 in scholarship money. The video (maximum 5 minutes) or essay (maximum 2500 words) was on one or a combination of the following topics within our mission: 1) generational theft: how the national debt, unfunded liabilities, and generational theft a? Ects younger generations; 2) government accountability: the importance of transparency and oversight to hold the federal government accountable; 3) importance of a well-informed public through objective information: the importance of young americans engaging in american politics, understanding our history, civics, and free enterprise system, and the value of a well-informed public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

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: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 60th 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: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,450.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -35.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $373K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2015 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.