Veterans for All Voters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861852155
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Brentwood, MO, USA
Phone
3256505812
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voter Education, Registration

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,876,520
Expenses
$1,216,711
Assets
$1,205,116
Liabilities
$367

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Todd Connor (CEO/Co-Founder)
  • Alberto Ramos (CEO - Current)

Highest reported compensation

  • Eric Bronner (COO/Founder): $195,915 total reported compensation
  • Todd Connor (CEO/Co-Founder): $175,756 total reported compensation
  • Alberto Ramos (CEO - Current): $131,919 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Veterans leading the charge for structural reforms that unlock competition, put voters first, and ensure our political system is accountable toand works forall Americans.

What it reported doing in 2025

Veterans for All Voters partnered with more than 45 civic reform organizations and coalition partners nationwide to support nonpartisan election reform efforts and strengthen democratic participation. The organization supported educational campaigns and outreach efforts related to open primaries, ranked-choice voting, anti-gerrymandering reforms, citizen initiative protections, and voting access for military and overseas voters. Coalition support included public education, strategic communications, veteran testimony coordination, grassroots engagement, and participation in state and national reform initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.1%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.2%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 44.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 44.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 57.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.1% of revenue deployed · 69.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $845K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $181K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.