Military Veterans in Journalism Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834253287
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Phone
2122465530
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$548,341
Expenses
$435,937
Assets
$700,059
Liabilities
$20,041

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Zachary Baddorf (Executive Director)
  • Russell Midori (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Zachary Baddorf (Executive Director): $36,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Get more military veterans working in america s newsrooms. Veterans bring perspective, nuanced understanding and on-the-ground experience about the military and veteran affairs that ultimately benefit newsrooms and news consumers.

What it reported doing in 2025

MVJ's Information Integrity Project (IIP) is a nonpartisan team of veterans and military family members working to guide the military/veteran community toward reliable information and away from harmful narratives. We launched the campaign in 2024 and our goal for this project is to partner with content creators to create videos that promote media literacy and highlight reputable organizations that foster a sense of community for Veterans. We are aiming to prevent the spread of bad information within the Veteran/Military community and remain nonpartisan by promoting media literacy and critical thinking.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.61; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.6% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $369K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.