The Special Forces Charitable Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274209721
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Southern Pines, NC, USA
Phone
7048608312
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,048,990
Expenses
$4,868,768
Assets
$3,633,240
Liabilities
$223,001

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARSIE ROGERS (PRESIDENT)
  • CHAD FAULKNER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BRAD MOSES (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JODI BURNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JODI BURNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $202,660 total reported compensation
  • CAMERON DAVIS (PROGRAMS DIRECTOR): $104,233 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 special forces charitable trust (sfct) provides meaningful and sustainable support to the green berets and their families. The sfct supports timely, innovative, and comprehensive programs and services designed to enhance the well-being and health of both the special forces soldier and his family.

What it reported doing in 2024

Family and command support - events held for special forces families to promote healthy, helpful strategies to navigate the physical, emotional, and mental challenges encountered in their daily lives. These events allow the families to rrefresh, refuel, and reconnect while providing new concepts and skills that can be immediately implemented in their personal and professional lives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd 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: 50.1%; rating input score 50; 16th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.