The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200366717
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6463815130
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,884,278
Expenses
$15,812,567
Assets
$8,069,023
Liabilities
$158,421

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID A WINTERS-SEE SCHEDULE O (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDYTA PIATEK (FINANCE OFFICER): $163,783 total reported compensation
  • DAVID A WINTERS-SEE SCHEDULE O (PRESIDENT): $152,380 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW KRAUSE (CREATIVE DIRECTOR): $118,315 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 intrepid fallen heroes fund serves military personnel suffering traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress, and other severe injuries.the intrepid fallen heroes fund serves military personnel suffering traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress and other severe injuries. We have built a series of twelve advanced treatment centers providing the best possible care, enabling them to continue to serve on active duty and enjoy a productive life. We now provide ongoing support for these facilities, including upgraded equipment, research funding, staffing and program support.

What it reported doing in 2024

Intrepid centers enduring support program: the intrepid fallen heroes fund (ifhf) is leading the effort to support service members suffering the terrible effects of traumatic brain injury (tbi), post-traumatic stress (pts), and other severe injuries, which afflict hundreds of thousands of military personnel. Over the past 18 years, ifhf has built a series of 12 specially-designed treatment facilities at military bases around the nation, within which service members receive the most advanced and proven care to address their injuries. The goal of treatment is returning these men and women to their regular duties in the armed forces and allowing them to enjoy a full and productive life. With the last of these centers opened in 2024, ifhf today is providing ongoing support for the treatment of these troops in five major areas: 1) upgrading diagnostic and therapy equipment so the latest and most effective facilities are available for patient care, 2) additional clinical staffing to provide more avenues for treatment, 3) research to expand understanding of the effects of and best treatments for tbi and pts, 4) upgrades to physical spaces to enhance the environment of care, 5) supporting programs to further all aspects of care and treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -168.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $4.7M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.