VIP Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861438875
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
602.430.4905
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,232
Expenses
$156,218
Assets
$1,252,559
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES D BARBOUR II (President)
  • KEITH TEEGARDIN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES D BARBOUR II (President)
  • KEITH TEEGARDIN (Vice President)
  • MICHAEL METZ (Treasurer)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The VIP Foundation was founded for the passionate purpose of helping those less fortunate in many critically needed areas – always with HEART … Hope, Embracing, Achieving, Raising ($), and Thriving.

What it reported doing in 2025

Dedicated to funding people, groups, organizations, and programs that address issues and improve the lives of others. The Foundation facilitates the growth and effectiveness of philanthropic contributions and expands the culture of giving to meet the needs of the community under the following categories: QUALITY OF LIFE - FACILITATE TO SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC SPACES, PARKS, TRAILS, THE OUTDOORS, ANIMAL WELFARE, CHILDREN'S ISSUES, AND EDUCATION.HEALTH & WELLNESS - FACILITATE TO SUPPORT FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE, NUTRITION, HEALTH-RELATED ORGANIZATIONS, WELLNESS, FITNESS, DISEASE PREVENTION AND RESEARCH, AND PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HEALTH EMERGENCIES.COLLABORATION - FACILITATE TO SUPPORT FOR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS, THE MILITARY, VETERANS, AND OTHER NON-PROFITS WITH A SHARED MISSION.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 93% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 34
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 17.5%; rating input score 17; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 8.3%; rating input score 8; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -129%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -82.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 8/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.