Veterans Assisting Veterans Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455431821
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Dracut, MA, USA
Phone
7813164486
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,486
Expenses
$6,238
Assets
$7,763
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES TIRABASSI (DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT FAIRBAIN (DIRECTOR)
  • DENNIS PARE (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To honor, support, and promote the ggod and welfare of the members of the armed forces of the United States, its wounded and or disabled veterans, and any other veterans in need and/or their families and to provide monetary or other assistance to non-profit organizations engaged in similar purposes, and to support and foster education of the general public in the sacrifice, honor, and actions of the United States Armed Forces.

What it reported doing in 2025

To provide monetary support to veterans and organizations that provide direct services to veterans and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -39.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -18.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -21.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.