The Military Order of the World Wars

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530109990
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7036834911
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,411,922
Expenses
$1,327,250
Assets
$14,303,109
Liabilities
$870,359

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • COL MICHAEL FARRELL (CHIEF OF STA): $166,460 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The military order of the world wars serves our nation and local communities by providing and supporting activities that promote and encourage responsible citizenship, patriotism, youth leadership, military and public service, veteran support, and strong national security.

What it reported doing in 2025

1.the military order of the world wars' (moww) was established in 1919 to provide veterans with the oportunity to continue to serve their country through numerous community outreach programs focused on patriotic and civic education for americas youth. 2.moww's feature program, partioctic education, consists of youth leadership conferences (ylc) and youth leadership seminar (yls) and the massing of colors program. The moww ylc and yls are conducted throughout the united states by local chapters-many at little or no cost to the high school students attending. These students receive patriotic education on leadership in a free society, free enterprise system concepts, principles of democracy, the constitution and bill of rights, and civic responsibilities associated with preserving american rights and freedoms. 3.students also develop speaking, writing and leadership skills, which contributes to being better citizens and future leaders. Moww also sponsors awards programs for reserve officer training corps (rotc) and junior rotc cadets (jrotc), scouting america and the girl scouts of the USA (gs-USA). Additionally, moww formally honors those who excel in the national security, homeland security, and law and order arenas. Finally, moww hosts "massing of colors" ceremonies in conjunction with flag day, the fourth of july, memorial day and veterans day. Moww does these things and more in partnership with many organizations. These organizations include, but are not limited to, the pershing rifles group, the national society of pershing rifles, rotc and junior rotc elements of the united states armed forces, scouting america, the girl scouts of the USA, the national sojourners, and the national society of the sons of the american revolution. 4.moww sponsors awards programs for reserve officer training corps (rotc) and junior rotc cadets, and recognition programs for the boy scouts of america and the girl scouts of the USA. The following awards were presented during the year; 661 rotc awards, 1851 jrotc awards, 661 gsusa awards and 1292 bsa awards were presented during the year. 5.moww hosts "massing of colors" ceremonies in conjunction with flag day, the fourth of july, memorial day and veterans day and sponsors various veterans' programs. The order held twenty (20) massing of colors ceremonies during the year. 6.moww formally conducted 987 outreach events honoring veterans, public servants involved in national and homeland security, as well as public safety law and order professionals. 7.the order provides members with a subscription of the moww magazine, "officer review". The "officer review" was published six times during the year and distributed to 5400 readers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.78; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.