Task Force Dagger Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800439987
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2012
Location
Terra Ceia, FL, USA
Phone
8137019100
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,641,080
Expenses
$1,462,574
Assets
$1,360,266
Liabilities
$74,035

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matt Parish (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Matt Parish (Executive Director): $105,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization provides assistance to more than 1,000 Special Forces members and their families through year-round programs that are crafted to heal, rebuild, and empower, providing them with mission, purpose and focus.

What it reported doing in 2024

Special Operations Forces Health Initiatives Progam: This program is a Mind, Body, Spirit and Purpose-driven progam focused on finding the root causes of illness and treating them with Functional Medicine. This program offers a full system, patient-centric approach to medicine and creates an enviornment conducive to healing and recovery. This life-changing knowledge and assistance equips the service members to regain control of their life and get back out into the world and restablish their place in society. This program also offers a platform to educate and empower health care providers, service members and their families how to repair the maintain themselves.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.