Young Americans Against Socialism

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842163669
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,725
Expenses
$179,328
Assets
$44,382

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUNNY R KUTCHER (Executive Director Secretary of th)
  • Seak Smith (President of the Board)

People named in this filing

  • SUNNY R KUTCHER (Executive Director Secretary of th)
  • Allison Rogers (Director of Communications Vice-Pr)
  • Morgan Zegers (Former Secretary of the Board)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission at Young Americans Against Socialism is to educate and inspire the next generation to reject the dangers of Socialism and embrace freedom. Through real stories facts and historical lessons we advocate for individual liberty free markets and limited government empowering young Americans to preserve and defend the values that uphold the American Dream.

What it reported doing in 2024

The creation of educational videos and material in the form of guides or curricula providing first-hand information and testimony from survivors of socialism and communism as well as social media videos detailing the history economics policy and culture surronding the issues of radical ideologies rooted in Marxism. Educational videos and materials are distributed on our website YAAS.org and via our social media platforms and have been seen and shared by millions of people

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -375.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -26% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.