Pulaski Veterans Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 364551526
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Somerset, KY, USA
- Rating
- 38
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Military, Veterans' Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,820
- Expenses
- $8,334
- Assets
- $155,452
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
People named in this filing
- Conley Mink (Commander)
- Art Oukes (1st Vice Commander)
- Wilbur Orem (Treasurer-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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Pulaski Veterans Inc.s primary mission is to provide a bed bedding basic furniture & kitchen & bathroom essentials to homeless veterans transitioning to housing. We work closely with the KY River Foothills in Kentucky and the VA to make their housing a home on move in day giving them the opportunity to focus on success and not stress of being in an empty home. This is a new mission implemented in November of 2025 and is a renewed focus on this one mission. Whereas previously we assisted veterans with utility needs ramps groceries etc.. We seek furniture donations first prior to purchasing and then refinish them if necessary. Although we will also use fundraised money to purchase needed items. We have a consistent standard list that each veteran will receive.
What it reported doing in 2025
Assisted our first homeless veteran transition in to housing by providing our standard list of furniture and essentials to make his housing a home
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 93% 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 4
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 3.2%; rating input score 3
- Program expense ratio: 5%; rating input score 5
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 35%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.65; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 3.2% of revenue deployed · 5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $416 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.