Belt Golden-agers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810367952
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Belt, MT, USA
- Phone
- 4062773861
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $73,418
- Expenses
- $52,561
- Assets
- $75,936
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARY BRODOCK (PRESIDENT)
- GLORIA WAREHIME (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
- LINDA ASSELS (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MARY BRODOCK (PRESIDENT)
- GLORIA WAREHIME (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
- LINDA ASSELS (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to provide opportunities for older adults that will support their independence and encourage their involvement in community life through health, wellness, education, and recreational programs and services.
What it reported doing in 2025
Nutritious meals are prepared three days a week, people are encouraged to come eat at the center and meals are delivered to shut ins. We also have a program to provide meals for one week to support the patient and caregiver when a senior is discharged from the hospital. We served a total of 2,351 meals in 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.1%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 70
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 49.1% of revenue deployed · 69.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $37K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.