Ballard Elks Lodge 827

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910142820
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2067840827
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,097,400
Expenses
$2,054,869
Assets
$1,873,248
Liabilities
$640,606

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KEN BARTLETT (TRUSTEE)
  • RON BENISH (ESQUIRE)
  • SPENCER CROWELL (CHAPLAIN)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inculcate the principles of charity, justice, brotherly love and fidelity; to recognize a belief in god; to promote the welfare and enhance the happiness of its members; to quicken the spirit of american patriotism; to cultivate good felloship; to perpetuate itself as a fraternal organization, and to provide for its government, the benevolent and protective order of elks of the unted states of america will serve the people and communities through benevolent programs, demonstrating that elks care and share.

What it reported doing in 2025

The lodge functions as a central meeting point for its members to plan and carry out local, regional, state and national programs for brotherhood, charity and service to the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.