Veterans Guest House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943160109
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Reno, NV, USA
Phone
7753246958
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,298,287
Expenses
$2,071,751
Assets
$12,776,545
Liabilities
$61,845

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sylvia Froslie (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Judge David Hardy (President)
  • Rebecca Kitchen (Vice President)
  • Jeff Nollette (Past-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sylvia Froslie (Chief Executive Officer): $198,571 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 Guest House promotes peace and wellness for the veteran community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Veterans Guest House removes barriers to access to healthcare for veterans and their families seeking medical care in Reno by providing free, inviting, temporary home and transportation assistance. The 16,000 sq ft guest house is conveniently located across the VA hospital and within two miles of three other major area hospitals. Veterans Guest House can house up to 33 individuals every night and provides hundreds of free meals to its guests each year. The Organization also has a new and recently renovated 8-bedroom Hospice House to provide 24-hour care to terminally-ill veterans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% 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.
  • 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.7%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 37.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.17; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.7% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.