Squadron a Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133896494
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2012
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122457468
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,373
Expenses
$78,264
Assets
$930,169
Liabilities
$10,157

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

51 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL D WITTER (PRESIDENT)
  • HENRY LAFAYETTE COLLINS III (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL KIESEL (SECRETARY): $700 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve, publish and display history, traditions, and memorabilia at squadron a and to make grants to deserving organizations associated with the military

What it reported doing in 2020

To preserve, publish and display history, traditions and memorabilia at squadron a and to make grants to deserving organizations associated with the military. Grants were made to approximately 15 organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.5%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -65.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.89; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $77K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $700 · 51 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.