Benevolent and Protective Order

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
041077520
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Adams, MA, USA
Phone
4136521252
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,603
Expenses
$48,954
Assets
$214,413
Liabilities
$2,624

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RONALD WONDERLICK (SECRETARY): $2,500 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA DOW (TREASURER): $1,696 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Scholarships, youth activities, donations, member activities, services and charities.

What it reported doing in 2021

Lodge activities for the purpose of raising monies for scholarships, youth activities, services and charities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -50.2%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.38; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.