Washington Oxi Day Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453059221
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023937790
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Commemorative Events

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$522,525
Expenses
$626,185
Assets
$90,978
Liabilities
$40,919

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew E Manatos (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Emanuel A Manatos (Executive Dir.): $74,984 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2024

Successfully executed the numerous events and activities leading up to and following the Eleventh Annual Washington DC Oxi Day Celebration. The purpose of these events is to educate American policymakers, opinion leaders and public, as well as others around the world, about Greece's profound role in the outcome of World War II by directly telling the story, and by honoring modern day heroes who exhibit the same courage as the Greeks did in continuing to fight to preserve and promote freedom and democracy around the world. The five awards given at these events are: The Oxi Day Courage Award for a man who took courageous action in an effort to protect or acquire freedom and democracy | The Oxi Day Courage Award for a woman who took courageous action in an effort to protect or acquire freedom and democracy |The Metropolitan Chrysostomos Award for courageous action to stop anti-Semitism or discrimination | The Haseotes Service Award for service in World War II | The OXI Service Award for service in the Korean War | The Calamos Service Award for service in the Vietnam War.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 39.7%; rating input score 40; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $578K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.