Thanks USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203973151
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Mclean, VA, USA
Phone
7035564259
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$658,464
Expenses
$1,373,033
Assets
$789,410
Liabilities
$621,682

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON ROSA (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELE STORK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THRU 2/19)

Highest reported compensation

  • JON ROSA (PRESIDENT): $192,400 total reported compensation
  • MICHELE STORK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THRU 2/19): $39,343 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Thanks U.S.a. Mobilizes americans of all ages to "thank" the men and women of the united states armed forces by providing financial need-based college, technical, and vocational school scholarships and pathways to meaningful employment for their spouses and college-aged children.

What it reported doing in 2019

Scholarship program - in 2019, 199 scholarships were awarded, bringing the total since 2006 to more than 4,500 scholarships valued at approximately $14 million. Recipients come from each of the 50 states and the district of columbia, and represent all military branches including the guard and reserves, with preference given to families of the fallen and wounded. Included in the 199 scholarships, are in-kind scholarships received and awarded by thanks U.S.a. Valued at $270,540. Thanks U.S.a. Also maintained pathways for patriots, a programmatic expansion that connects our scholarship applicants and the corporate community to help bridge the gap between education and meaningful employment. We do that by facilitating networking, mentoring, and internship opportunities between our scholars and sponsors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -108.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $192K · 32 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • 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.

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: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.