Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Dept of Arizona

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860076886
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Tempe, AZ, USA
Phone
4809415258
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$525,300
Expenses
$612,567
Assets
$2,461,624
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Lewis Wood (Adjutant): $45,374 total reported compensation
  • Hope Blood (Quartermaster): $42,476 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our Mission: To foster camaraderie among United States veterans of overseas conflicts. To serve our veterans, the military and our communities. To advocate on behalf of all veterans. Our Vision: Ensure that veterans are respected for their service, always receive their earned entitlements, and are recognized for the sacrifices they and their loved ones have made on behalf of this great country.

What it reported doing in 2024

The VFW Department of Arizona maintains a robust network of both employees and volunteers whose main objective is helping veterans navigate the intricacies of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This includes applying for benefits, enrolling in health care and solving various problems that can and do arise when dealing with the VA. Our paid Service Officers obtained over 70 million dollars in direct compensation for Arizona disabled veterans during fiscal year 23-24 . This is in keeping with the VFW's slogan of Veterans Helping Veterans. The outright expenditures related to this important function approaches $210,000, not counting the untold hours by our volunteer members.

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

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $248K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.