Abell Masonic Hall Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680190032
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Ukiah, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7074623002
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $57,621
- Expenses
- $104,839
- Assets
- $272,405
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BOB BRATSIS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- BOB BRATSIS (PRESIDENT)
- JONATHAN VAN PELT (DIRECTOR)
- JACOB BECKET-JONES (DIRECTOR)
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
The mission of the masons of California is to foster personal growth and improve the lives of others. Our mission is guided by the enduring and relevant principles of our fraternity: brotherly love. We value respect, freedom, kindness tolerance, and our differences - religious, ethnic, cultural, social, generational, and educational - and strive for harmony in our individual lives, in our lodges and in the global community. Relief. We take responsibility for the well-being of our brothers, our families, and the community as a whole. We provide relief through philanthropy, community involvement, and delivery of excellent care. Truth. We stay true to our personal code of conduct and ethics - honor, integrity, personal responsibility, and the continuous pursuit of knowledge.
What it reported doing in 2024
Fraternal order operating under lodge system for the benefit of fraternal members. The hall association operates the buildings that the lodge occupies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- 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: 82
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
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: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -81.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.6; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th 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 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.