Fulcrum Tactical Training and Support Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264143315
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Mokena, IL, USA
Phone
7084664939
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$279,980
Expenses
$283,106
Assets
$11,958
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fulcrum Tactical Training and Support was formed with the objective of becoming the leading affordable law enforcement training organization that provides otherwise unattainable training and support to those who most require it: our law enforcement brothers and sisters protecting and serving our communities. Founded in 2009, Fulcrum Tactical has already provided reduced-rate, tier-one tactical training to over 1,500 officers from over 250+ Law Enforcement Agencies. Officers receiving training include those from the largest departments, such as Chicago Police SWAT personnel to departments with less than 12 sworn officers in the heartland of America.

What it reported doing in 2011

Provides free or significantly reduced cost tier-one level tactical training and support to Law Enforcement agencies across the United States. We have trained the Chicago Police 60 member SWAT team, members of the Illinois State Police Tactical Response Team, Pentagon Force Protection Agency, as well as departments with less than 18 members in the mid-west.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 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: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -15.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -23.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $250K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.