Global War on Terrorism Memorial Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473700489
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023397910
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,469,098
Expenses
$2,799,877
Assets
$2,569,493
Liabilities
$373,089

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL R RODRIGUEZ (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL R RODRIGUEZ (PRESIDENT/CEO): $376,320 total reported compensation
  • DAVID BEARDEN (TREASURER/SECRETARY/COO/GENERAL COUNSEL): $340,301 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER R BALLOU (CHIEF OF STAFF): $201,274 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The global war on terrorism memorial foundation is designated by congress to plan, fund, and build the national global war on terrorism memorial on the national mall in Washington, d.c., to honor all who have served and sacrificed in the ongoing global war on terrorism, including uniformed and nonuniformed veterans, and the families who have supported them.

What it reported doing in 2025

Activities related to the planning, promotion, design, unveiling, and eventual construction of the national global war on terrorism memorial, including soliciting input from a design advisory council, members of the general public, and other key stakeholders; assembling the design team and related advisors; and coordinating with governmental agencies responsible for design approval and maintaining memorial sites on the national mall.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 47.3%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.8% of revenue deployed · 47.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $376K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $532K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.