The Joshua Chamberlain Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262208651
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Clayton, MO, USA
Phone
3147145190
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$713,042
Expenses
$520,327
Assets
$1,732,217
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Holly Schmitz (Executive Director of Deve)
  • Todd Nault (Executive Director of Oper)
  • Matthew Cutler (President)
  • Randy Soriano (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Holly Schmitz (Executive Director of Deve): $58,300 total reported compensation
  • Todd Nault (Executive Director of Oper): $39,320 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 mission of The Joshua Chamberlain Society is to identify and adopt wounded or fallen military service members who have made such an extraordinary sacrifice for our country. In the same fashion that our service members have sacrificed for their country forever, the society is dedicated to making an on-going commitment to our heroes for the

What it reported doing in 2024

Adopt veterans of the families of deceased veterans and commit to provide support for the long term. This support is multi-faceted and comes in the form for gifts, tuition assistance, monetary donations, and the like -- anything that is identified as something that will improve the quality of life for these heroic Americans. During this year, 14 heroes have been adopted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.7%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 57.6%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 50th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.33; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.7% of revenue deployed · 57.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $300K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $58K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.