Objective Zero Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814324563
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Sioux Falls, SD, USA
Phone
(202) 573-9660
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hot Line, Crisis Intervention Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$540,123
Expenses
$548,405
Assets
$447,128
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Mercado (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Elizabeth Mercado (Executive Director): $68,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Combating military and veteran suicide through a connected community of peer support and access to mental health and wellness resources, powered by technology.

What it reported doing in 2024

Objective Zero invested $300,586 in continued development of the Objective Zero App to enhance stability improve user experience and expand evidence-informed tools for service members veterans caregivers and military families. It devoted $140,560 in program salaries to support core program implementation including peer engagement safety monitoring and coordinated resource navigation. The organization also used $20,454 to operate its HubSpot CRM system which managed user data supported communication workflows and strengthened Objective Zeros capacity to connect individuals with timely support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -1.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $519K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.