American Legion Post 520

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237098303
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Sun Valley, CA, USA
Phone
8187679461
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$100,437
Expenses
$98,744
Assets
$77,688
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CRAIG SMEAD (Commander)
  • KEN OSMOND (1st Vice Cmdr)
  • RON MAAS (Treasurer)

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

Veteran's organization

What it reported doing in 2016

Community donations

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.6%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 26
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th 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: 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: 1.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 37; 37th 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: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.6% of revenue deployed · 26.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 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 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.