Benev & Protective Order of Elks 678

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050106200
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Westerly, RI, USA
Phone
4015969132
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$75,954
Expenses
$89,075
Assets
$461,510
Liabilities
$309,139

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CELINA BRASIER (Secretary): $5,300 total reported compensation
  • Tonya Smith (Treasurer): $5,100 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The lodge is a local affiliate lodge of a national fraternal organization of elks dedicated to helping with local community projects and assisting whenever needed in order to encourage good fellowship.

What it reported doing in 2014

The organization provides newsletters and social activities to its members. The organization helps to foster community through offering activities, scholarships, and services to the local general public.

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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.18; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.