Stronghold Leadership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882822245
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Malvern, PA, USA
Phone
4844592383
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$307,572
Expenses
$312,968
Assets
$79,292
Liabilities
$51,382

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIC DIAMOND (PRESIDENT)
  • BRADLY PELLEGRIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRADLY PELLEGRIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $93,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At stronghold leadership, we empower professionals and veterans to transform their careers and organizations through world-class certification education in project management, change management, and process improvement. Led by seasoned veterans, consultants, and educators, we deliver practical, high-impact learning that drives excellence, fuels innovation, and strengthens a lifelong community of growth and leadership.

What it reported doing in 2024

Stronghold leadership prepared twenty-three (23) transitioning service members, fifteen (15) veterans, and twenty-four (24) military supporters for corporate employment by providing a professional training experience and industry certifications that enhance their current skillsets. As part of the program, students received valuable training in project management (both traditional waterfall and agile), change management, and lean six sigma process improvement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 60% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 49.3%; rating input score 49
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 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: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 80.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 45.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.2% of revenue deployed · 49.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.