American Legion Cathay Post 384 Department of California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946101923
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4153922882
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$109,729
Expenses
$114,575
Assets
$318,628
Liabilities
$8,641

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • AARON LOW (DIRECTOR)
  • ED WONG (Director)
  • RON RITTER (Secretary)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide services, including social and recreational, to our members through our post. Also, indirectly, through the national organization to disabled veterans. We are active in our community by putting on special events of a patriotic and community interest, such as jrotc.

What it reported doing in 2025

Make scholarship and community recognition awards for our fire, police, jrotc, rotc, community organizations, and programs for our membership.we are active with other veterans organizations across the country to promote the welfare of our returning veterans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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: 7
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8%; rating input score 8
  • Program expense ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 8
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -4.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.78; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8% of revenue deployed · 7.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.