Northeast Ohio Foundation for Patriotism

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273277678
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Rocky River, OH, USA
Phone
2165206164
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$559,750
Expenses
$511,606
Assets
$124,156
Liabilities
$31,635

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG RENKAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • GREG RENKAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $77,004 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN ANGLIN (MANAGER OF COMMUNITY IMPAC): $54,015 total reported compensation
  • SHAWNA WHITLOCK (DIRECTOR OF PHILANTHROPY): $39,241 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The northeast Ohio foundation for patriotism (neopat) is a non-profit section 501(c)(3) organization created to honor patriots who serve or have served in the armed forces by working to minimize the sacrifices the soldiers and their families endure. In addition to voluntarily spending extended periods of time away from home and risking injury or death to secure our freedom, neopat has identified that service men and women often return to civilian life with needs that are not directly addressed by existing governmental programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule oover the past 13 years, neopat has directly impacted over 11,000 active duty military, reservists, military dependents, and veterans across 20 counties in northeast Ohio. More than 350 corporations and 3,500 families have made donations to neopat during this same time period. Donations are distributed as follows: 60% goes to supprt deserving military families, helping to fund emergency medical needs, food and housing support, transportation and community needs, morale care packages, family holiday events for military units, and for such specific programs as the adopt-a-family holiday program. 20% supports patriotic community events such as the flags of unity display, the honoring of area new recruits, the operation Ohio flags of freedom community displays and wreaths across america. 15% supports the remembering of ne Ohio's fallen heros including gold star families memorial, the olmsted falls vietnam war memorial, the help for heros initiative, and rally for the troops. The final 5% supports scholarships set up in memory of fallen soldiers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.9%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 42.6%; rating input score 43
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 45.4%; rating input score 45; 28th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.9% of revenue deployed · 42.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $218K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 25 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.