U Matter 2 Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921899007
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Plymouth, IN, USA
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,269
Expenses
$32,175
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHAD KING (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KELLEY MILLER (TREASURY)
  • CHAD KING (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICK LEARY (PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Umatter nbsp;2 nbsp; inc nbsp; is nbsp; a nbsp;501(c)(3) nbsp; nonprofit nbsp; founded nbsp; by nbsp; sylvia nbsp; and nbsp; chad nbsp; king nbsp; in nbsp;2016 nbsp; for nbsp; over nbsp; nineyears nbsp; our nbsp; simple nbsp; mission nbsp; is nbsp; to nbsp; serve nbsp; one nbsp; veteran/first nbsp; responder nbsp; at nbsp; atimemanyare nbsp; struggling nbsp; with nbsp; ptsd nbsp; unemployment nbsp; homelessness nbsp; and nbsp; other nbsp; issues nbsp; as nbsp; they nbsp; try nbsp; to nbsp; find nbsp; their nbsp; way nbsp; in nbsp; our nbsp; world nbsp; our nbsp; message nbsp; is: nbsp; you nbsp; are nbsp; not nbsp; alone nbsp; we nbsp; demonstrate nbsp; this nbsp; daily nbsp; one nbsp; of nbsp; the nbsp; organizations nbsp; main nbsp; objectives nbsp; is nbsp; to nbsp; provide nbsp; resources nbsp; for nbsp; employment nbsp; and nbsp; housingour nbsp; programs nbsp; are nbsp; pantry nbsp; for nbsp; heroes nbsp; chicks nbsp; forvets nbsp; operation nbsp; sight nbsp; and nbsp; local nbsp; Indiana nbsp; transport nbsp; through nbsp; assisting nbsp; with nbsp; transportati

What it reported doing in 2025

Bike ride eventsfathers day holidays volunteer work food program farm program

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 41.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $44K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 12 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule M noncash within contributions did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.