The Veterans Artist Program Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271972364
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2017
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Military, Veterans' Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $161,008
- Expenses
- $142,963
- Assets
- $20,412
- Liabilities
- $14,829
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BR MCDONALD (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- BR MCDONALD (PRESIDENT)
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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Veteran artist program (vap takes artist, who are also veterans, and partners them with existing professional artist to highlight veter-related issues and propel talented veterans into the mainstream creative arts community
What it reported doing in 2017
Vap partnered with the veterans administration to select 10 women veterans to showcase their work in va medical clinics around the united states. The 10 women veterans were selected from over 100 entries and resulted in national media recognition and follow-on exhibitions by the veterans artists. The work is still being shown around the country and the exhibition was part of the va's center for women veterans
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.73; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $122K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.