Navy Football Brotherhood Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823966681
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Annapolis, MD, USA
Phone
4437142991
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$459,101
Expenses
$223,757
Assets
$543,864
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Frank Schenk (President)
  • Brad Chatlos (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Frank Schenk (President)
  • Brad Chatlos (Vice President)
  • Pat Hoffman (Treasurer)

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

To serve and support the United States Naval Academy Football Program and players of the past present and future as follows: 1 Mentor men and women pursuing Navy Marine officer careers; 2 Provide social and networking fellowship and stewardship; 3 Support families of fallen teammates; and 4 Celebrate the legacy of Navy football.

What it reported doing in 2025

Grants Program- The NFB Grants Program provides assistance to former Navy football players that are in need of assistance from medical issues natural disasters death family support and financial matters. Members provide specified donations to each target initiative. In 2023 we had three dedicated programs supporting our members and families. Benefits provided include medical equipment nursing care mortgage assistance home repair goods food scholarship flowers and organizational merchandise.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.7%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.3%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 64; 64th 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: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.7% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $214K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.