American Legion Post 0351

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
350883742
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Elberfeld, IN, USA
Phone
8129839506
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$175,596
Expenses
$142,034
Assets
$197,883
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ROBERT OETH (COMMANDER)
  • LARRY RALEY (FIRST VICE)
  • JEFF KLUMP (FINANCE CHAI)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Veterans organization promoting patriotism and community spirit.

What it reported doing in 2016

Contributions to tax exempt organizations

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.9%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 10
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.1%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.9% of revenue deployed · 9.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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 28/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.