American Legion 119 Heisler Johnson

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
596173244
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Largo, FL, USA
Phone
7275842038
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$121,297
Expenses
$71,974
Assets
$444,399
Liabilities
$1,247

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARK BLOOMER (FINANCE OFFI)
  • ANGELA S BRADLEY (ADJUTANT & C)

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

Overview

Mission

In spirit of service and not self, the mission of the american legion auxiliary heisler-johnson unit 119 is to support the american legion and honor the sacrifice of those who serve by enhancing the lives of veterans, military and their families. For god and country we advocate for veterans, educate our citizens, mentor youth, promote patriotism, good citizenship, peace and security.

What it reported doing in 2024

To help out veterans and their families of all military services of the USA through donations, volunteerism and activities run by the american legion family. Monthly meetings are held to inform members of all services available to them as veterans. Dinners and special events are held to support comradery and help to all veterans and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 73% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, 9% for grants, and 15% for member benefits.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.8%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: 40.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.17; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.8% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $63K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.