Stand by the Wounded
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 452592861
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Southern Pines, NC, USA
- Rating
- 56
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Victims' Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $17,524
- Expenses
- $8,512
- Assets
- $17,975
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK GELLERT (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MARK GELLERT (PRESIDENT)
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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Stand by the wounded strives to meet the long term needs of critically wounded special operations members by addressing voids in the rehabilitation process and facilitating a more complete recovery.
What it reported doing in 2016
Assistance provided to wounded military personnel and family members
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 6
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.6%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 51.4%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 11 of 11 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.
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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.