Moph Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873168304
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Springfield, VA, USA
Phone
8446674386
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$168,729
Expenses
$198,202
Assets
$46,601
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Ralph Ferguson (Chair)
  • Robert Olivarez (Director)
  • Gusav Wittschack (Secretary)

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

Our organization brings combat wounded veterans and patriotic donors together so that we can help promote their recovery as they spilled their blood in the name of our nations freedom. Our sole purpose is to raise funds for programs executed by the Military Order of the Purple Heart. Our goal is to help make sure their programs receive robust support so that more Purple Heart recipients and their families can be provided the necessary assistance. We represent the thousands of servicemen and women who were wounded actively defending our country in times of war. Their voices must be heard and their sacrifices should be known. We work tirelessly to ensure that these patriots are cared for on their paths to recovery. The MOPH Fund is to provide essential assistance to America's Veterans and their Families by directly supporting the programs and services of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our only program is supporting the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the USA Order. We continue to establish initial contacts with potential sources of revenue, documenting specific process to process the Orders requests for support, and raising limited funds to be distributed in 2025. We were able to raise $30,030 for restricted use and $163,860 for unresticted use which included an unusual grant of $100,000. We provided two $10,000 grants, restricted for disaster relief, and one $10,000 restricted grant, Veteran Advocacy, National Convention, to the Order. We provided one unrestricted grant of $100,000 and another for $57,400 to support Veteran Advocacy Programs operated by orgainzations outside the Order.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $78.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -17.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 95.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 60% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $194K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.