American Legion Auxiliary Post 114 Henry Meldrum

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431300535
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Sikeston, MO, USA
Phone
5734719956
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$139,850
Expenses
$150,924
Assets
$91,486
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN HUEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TAMMEY CUMMINS (SGT@ARMS)
  • BARBARA TURNBO (CHAPLAIN)
  • KAREN HUEY (PRESIDENT)

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

The american legion auxiliary -unit 114 is a local membership organization of women whose relatives served in the american armed forces during certain wartime periods. The auxiliary keeps its members apprised of stories for soldiers, veterans, families & youth. The auxiliary supports various projects which directly or indirectly benefit veterans and/or their descendants. They educate children for leadership through supporting girls nation, the spirit of youth fund, and by organizing local scholaraship programs. They help their members through financial hardships by providing financial assistance to auxiliary members who have exhausted all other personal and community resources. Activites supported include the following: poppy sales youth baseball programs blood drives girls nation other community activities

What it reported doing in 2024

Social and recreational activities: the american legion auxiliary -unit 114 sponsors various youth activities, such as girls nation and youth baseball. In addition, it provides for donations to various charities described in irc 501(c)(3) which benefit the members and/or their descendants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th 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: 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 213 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $127K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.