Annapolis Council 1384 Charities Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562503110
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Annapolis, MD, USA
Phone
4103201160
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,616
Expenses
$58,680
Assets
$186,751

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARTIN MARDIROS (President)
  • RAYMOND P SEARS (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • MARTIN MARDIROS (President)
  • RAYMOND P SEARS (Vice President)
  • LEE HEATH (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary purpose of the organization is to support the charitable giving of Annapolis Council 1384 to support our Parish needs, Religious Education including scholarships, Community Needs such as food banks, and other organizations providing assistance to the needy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funds were raised and donated to two parishes' outreach programs for the needy. Distribution of winter coats and jackets to youth in the community. Donations to parish food banks. Matching funds programs to donate to two parishes outreach to the poor.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.18; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.