American Legion Post 91 of New Salem

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450275026
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New Salem, ND, USA
Phone
7018437508
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,183,905
Expenses
$1,300,638
Assets
$3,111,191
Liabilities
$219,017

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD COLE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RICHARD COLE (PRESIDENT)
  • BRENT RUD (GAMING DIREC)
  • EUGENE SCHAFFER (SECRETARY)

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

To uphold and defend the constitution of the united states of america; to maintain law and order; to foster and perpetuate a one hundred percent americanism; to preserve the memories and incidents of our associations in the great wars; to inculcate a sense of individual obligation to the community, state and nation; to combat the autocracy of both classes and the masses; to make right the master of might; to promote peace and good will on earth; to safeguard and transmit to posterity the principals of justice, freedom and democracy; to consecrate and sanctify our comradeship by our devotion to mutual helpfulness.

What it reported doing in 2024

Promotion and investment in local communities and projects within the communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.6%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 58.3%; rating input score 58; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 40.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.39; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 41.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.6% of revenue deployed · 66.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.