Vfw National Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381359597
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eaton Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
5176631521
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Residential Care & Adult Day Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,050,793
Expenses
$6,994,534
Assets
$25,757,591
Liabilities
$373,578

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY BLAKE (PRESIDENT (DISTRICT 8))
  • SANDI KRIEBEL (VICE PRESIDENT (DISTRICT 4))
  • BRENDA BRYANT (VFW AUXILIARY NATIONAL PRESIDENT)
  • CARLA MARTINEZ (VFW AUXILIARY NATIONAL PRESIDENT - PART YEAR)
  • MICHAEL WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $190,890 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The vfw national home assists military, veterans, and their families with children, by creating a foundation of services and resources to achieve their personal and family goals in order to move forward in a positive, safe and healthy environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Direct care - helps the children and families of active-duty military and veterans who reside in houses on campus. On-campus services include, but are not limited to, food, clothing, health services, staffing requirements, and veteran resources. On-campus and off-campus direct care services including national toll-free helpline for veteran and military families, including case management.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.5%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 66th 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: 30.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.68; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.5% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.