American Legion Auxiliary 82 Harry White Wilmer
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521308879
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- La Plata, MD, USA
- Phone
- 3016434321
- Rating
- 35
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $184,454
- Expenses
- $134,850
- Assets
- $132,852
- Liabilities
- $652
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LESLEY RADCLIFF (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- EDNA CAYWOOD (EXECUTIVE CO)
- KATHIE FLANAGAN (HISTORIAN)
- LINDA GIMMELL (SERGEANT-AT-)
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 the spirit of service not self, the mission of the american legion auxiliary is to support the american legion and honor the sacrifice of those who serve by enhancing the lives of our veterans, military, and their families, both at home and abroad. Fo god and country, we advocate for veterans, educate our citizens, mentor youth, and promote patriotism, good citizenship, peace and security.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provide support and assistance to community organizations and schools - conduct an americanism essay contest - support girl scout organization that sends cookies to soldiers overseas - provide scholarships to high school seniors who have family member(s) in the military or are veterans - support ccso shop with a cop - support local 4h organizations
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 14.6%; rating input score 15; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 26.9%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $96K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 12 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 15/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.