American Legion Dan River Post 1097

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540676433
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Danville, VA, USA
Phone
4347937531
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$371,731
Expenses
$299,325
Assets
$612,916
Liabilities
$3,895

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANTHONY ALLMOND (3RD VICE COMMANDER)
  • MALCOM BARKER (FIRST VICE COMMANDER)
  • JIM HIGGS (SECOND VICE COMMANDER)

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

To provide support for veterans, needy families in the community, and local charitable organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 39
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 19.5%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 148.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 74% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $115K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.