Military Memorial Museum of Upper Cumberland

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621225830
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Crossville, TN, USA
Phone
2395608036
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$599,865
Expenses
$27,289
Assets
$1,121,626
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARK PFAFFENROTH (Chairman)
  • ALEXANDER ALENITSCH (Treasurer)
  • BOB TERRAFORTE (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Military Memorial Museum of Upper Cumberland is entrusted with the preservation of historically significant artifacts that tells the story of our military history for future generations. For twenty-two years we have welcomed students to the museum, to learn and hear about their country's history. Since 2007 the museum has partnered with local schools to participate in yearly scheduled field trips to the museum. Education is one of the Museum's main objectives.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Military Memorial Museum is located in one of Crossvilles oldest structures, built in 1885. It served as the second county courthouse until 1905 when a fire ravaged the interior. After renovation in the 1930s, the building became an elementary-high school and library. During the 1940s it was a location for wrestling matches, a USO venue and housed various government offices until 2002 when the museum was established. The building is constructed using Crab Orchard quarried stone and is listed on the National Registry of Historic Buildings and is included as part of the Tennessee Civil War Trails.The Military Memorial Museum is located in one of Crossvilles oldest structures, built in 1885. It served as the second county courthouse until 1905 when a fire ravaged the interior. After renovation in the 1930s, the building became an elementary-high school and library. During the 1940s it was a location for wrestling matches, a USO venue and housed various government offices until 2002 when the museum was established. The building is constructed using Crab Orchard quarried stone and is listed on the National Registry of Historic Buildings and is included as part of the Tennessee Civil War Trails

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 18
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 95
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 1.5%; rating input score 1
  • Program expense ratio: 21.8%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: $306.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 95.5%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 41.1; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -64.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 121.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 43% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 1.5% of revenue deployed · 21.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.