Valley Forge Military Academy Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231178880
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Wayne, PA, USA
- Phone
- 6109891200
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Secondary, High School
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,801,664
- Expenses
- $14,166,994
- Assets
- $41,854,697
- Liabilities
- $8,946,470
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- COL STUART HELGESON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- COL STUART HELGESON (PRESIDENT): $248,411 total reported compensation
- JOHN LANETTI (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $161,369 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To educate cadets, with in an academic and military environment, to be fully prepared for their responsibilities as citizen leaders who are mentally alert, sound in body, considerate of others and possessed of love of god and country, high moral standards and strong character traits that will make all a credit to themselves, their families, their alma mater, their country, and their god.
What it reported doing in 2024
Valley forge provides cadets with an educational experience built on our five cornerstones: academic excellence, character development, personal motivation, physical development, and leadership. A valley forge education is rooted in quality academic programs supported by leadership responsibilities and strong athletic and extracurricular opportunities. The academy hosted 88 students during the year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 63% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 58.6%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 40.2%; rating input score 40
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -44.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.95; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 58.6% of revenue deployed · 40.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $248K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.