Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 6753

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236437395
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Knoxville, PA, USA
Phone
8143264321
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$342,684
Expenses
$230,236
Assets
$322,997
Liabilities
$869

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • FINIS GUILL (COMMANDER)
  • EDWIN CALHOUN (SR VICE COMMANDER)
  • GERALD GAYE (JR VICE COMMANDER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To strengthen the camaraderie among vfw members and their families, to perpetuate commemorate the memory history of deceased veterans and to assist veterans and their families

What it reported doing in 2024

Community activities and events to encourage and strengthen the bond between vfw veterans and their community to further poster american patriotism and to support and commemorate veterans and their families

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 program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.7%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.8%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.7% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 171 of 171 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $225K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.