Warriors in Need Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991267817
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Camarillo, CA, USA
Phone
7472149389
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$163,840
Expenses
$126,746
Assets
$105,572
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charles B Ingram (CEO)
  • Nicholos Matthews (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Charles B Ingram (CEO)
  • Nicholos Matthews (Vice President)
  • Nathan Foersch (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 specific purpose of the corporation is to help prevent veteran suicide and facilitate a successful transition for veterans from military life to civilian life and to continue to offer support and assistance thereafter by 1 providing support guidance and opportunity for securing employment as a civilian 2 funding sponsoring and otherwise supporting motorsport events as a way to provide an opportunity for veterans to participate in and to find a community that gives them a sense of joy accomplishment and comradery and 3supporting any activity which helps and supports veterans and the veteran community with suicide prevention and transition back to civilian life.

What it reported doing in 2025

In addition to the major programs described above the organization provided ongoing support services to veterans to facilitate successful transition to civilian life and promote long-term stability and well-being. These activities included individualized guidance resource coordination and follow-up support to address barriers related to employment community integration and mental wellness. The organization also engaged in outreach relationship-building with community partners and development of opportunities aligned with its mission including initiatives that promote suicide prevention peer connection and continued engagement beyond initial program participation. These efforts collectively support the organizations mission to reduce isolation improve quality of life and assist veterans in achieving sustainable civilian careers and community reintegration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 18th 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: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.6%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 37.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 62% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $109K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.