American Legion Post 318

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
436097274
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Parkville, MO, USA
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$175,352
Expenses
$131,909
Assets
$119,699
Liabilities
$14,413

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN R STREMMEL (COMMANDER)
  • R CHRIS WALLINGFORD (1ST VICE COM)
  • JUNE MCCAMMON (2ND VICE COM)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The american legion post 318 seeks to contribute to the betterment of the lives of veterans of our united states armed forces branches through community engagement, outreach, and financial support

What it reported doing in 2024

During the course of 2024, post 318 has provided numerous hours in support of various veteran causes to include our weekly luncheons, use of our facility to community groups such as the bsa, civil air patrol, the vfw, parkville mainstreet, the parkville senior center, and the parkville chamber of commerce. The members of post 318 collectively volunteered over 5,000 community service hours assisting veterans with the process of filing claims with the va, mental health checks, and assisting with household and budgetary needs to those who served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 35
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th 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: 24.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 35.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 20 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.