American Legion Post 179

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
940833995
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
San Anselmo, CA, USA
Phone
4154574609
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$457,668
Expenses
$449,598
Assets
$119,844
Liabilities
$177

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LEONARD BRATCHER (SARGEANT AT)
  • JOE CRESALIA (HISTORIAN)
  • CHRIS MILLS (FINANCE OFFI)

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

Veteran's benefits, children's programs, and maintenance of the post's historical community building

What it reported doing in 2025

Veterans' post promoting the social welfare of its members and surrounding community

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 43.9%; rating input score 44
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 20th 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: 1.8%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43% of revenue deployed · 43.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 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 43/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.