Step Up for Soldiers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113734149
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Kure Beach, NC, USA
Phone
9104583389
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,384
Expenses
$9,877
Assets
$332,971
Liabilities
$2,822

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES KELLY (BOARDMEMBER)
  • THOMAS RUSSELL (DIRECTOR)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide disabled veterans who experienced loss of limb and mobility problems with the resources necessary to adjust to a post-war environment. As a result of the events and fundraisers sponsored by step up for soldiers, we strive to not only enhance their lives and those of their families but also to restore their confidence and positive self image.

What it reported doing in 2020

The organization has constructed a single family residence for the use of returning veterans to use while attending school. Total capitalized costs for this project including land and building total 206,448 from inception to date. This residence was sold for 238,840 during december 2020 and the intention is to distribute the proceeds to qualifed charities with emphasis on serving veterans in the near future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.3%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 55.4%; rating input score 55
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 80%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 33.71; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.3% of revenue deployed · 55.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.