American Legion Post 179 Neal E Fonger

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382056029
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Grandville, MI, USA
Phone
6164539861
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$358,929
Expenses
$360,948
Assets
$139,567
Liabilities
$9,236

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JESUS SANABRIA (COMMANDER)
  • BILL KALETA (FINANCE OFF)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

This is a 501(c)(19) veterans organization.

What it reported doing in 2018

This is a 501 c (19) veterans organization

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1125 of 14 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $361K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2018
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.