American Legion Post 0444 Hans E Lian

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410691298
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Middle River, MN, USA
Phone
2182223538
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,660
Expenses
$85,612
Assets
$138,382
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK KUJAVA (FINANCE OFFICER): $6,360 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Veterans' membership services & promotion of patriotism

What it reported doing in 2020

Raised funds in support of educational, civic, youth, and charitable causes by selling pull-tabs, conducting bingo under state of Minnesota license at licensed site. Results reported on schedule g, also part ix.(double reporting of grants paid is reversed - part ix, line 24 entries)

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2020
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.