Vetransfer Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454847238
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4148030612
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$44,989
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Nicholas Wichert (Pres/Director)
  • Greg Meier (Sec/director)
  • Jackie Darr (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary purpose of VETransfer is to provide relief to the distressed by improving entrpreneurship among members of the military veteran community; provide job stability for veterans through business ownership training and mentoring; and make grants and provide early stage start-up financial assistance to veteran-owned businesses. As a result, this will combat deterioration of the veteran community by providing support for economic self-sufficiency and lessening the burdens of government by supporting the veteran employment effort of the state and federal government.

What it reported doing in 2015

VETransfer provided a total of $40,000 to four veteran start-up businesses, who had completed required business training programs, for various operation and start-up expenses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -155% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -150% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -134.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.