Nebraska City Veterans Memorial Building Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811155784
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Nebraska City, NE, USA
Phone
4022097152
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$267,689
Expenses
$236,903
Assets
$261,568
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Donna Kruse (President)

People named in this filing

  • Donna Kruse (President)
  • David Beck (Treasurer)
  • John Helm (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 Nebraska City Veterans Memorial Building Project is an organization of citizens formed to accomplish the renovation and revitalization of the historic Nebraska City Veterans Memorial Building in southeast Nebraska. The Project is dedicated to the re-establishment of a space for cultural, educational and recreational activities in southeast Nebraska and southwest Iowa.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Nebraska City Veterans Memorial Building will continue to need maintenance of the building, the grounds, HVAC systems, security systems, elevator and other required equipment for the health and safety of those who use the building. In time, systems will need regular replacement to ensure continuation of minimal operating standards and the building structure will require regular maintenance. Also, further renovation may be undertaken to open up more of the building for use and staff education on the proper use and cleaning of systems will be needed. During 2025 expenditures included installation of an exterior sign, tables, chairs, dishwasher rent, alarm inspections, alarm monitoring, water system repair, and building renovation loan final payment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 11.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 43; 43rd 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: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $222K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.