The Green Beret Networking Task Group
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 881651068
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- San Antonio, TX, USA
- Phone
- 7262191565
- Rating
- 93
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $66,452
- Expenses
- $1,406
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher Brian Wells (President of the Board and CEO)
- Grant McGregor (Vice President of the Board)
People named in this filing
- Christopher Brian Wells (President of the Board and CEO)
- Grant McGregor (Vice President of the Board)
- Leah Fiddler (Secretary of the Board)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To receive contributions to support Abandoned Afghan Partners who are attempting to flee Afghanistan due to serious and credible threats against them because of their work with the U.S. Military. We help them to survive until their Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Cases are finished.
What it reported doing in 2025
TRAVEL COSTS: When a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) case is finally approved or we have to move someone out of Afghanistan due to increased physical threat against on of our Afghan members Our organization sometimes pays for flights and other travel expenses to get the individual or individuals out of Afghanistan and to a Safe-Haven Country.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 97.9%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $66K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 8 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.