Benevolent & Protective Order

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237131500
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Alamosa, CO, USA
Phone
7195892362
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$344,896
Expenses
$101,758
Assets
$208,471
Liabilities
$47,139

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Lola Hershey (Treasurer): $6,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To serve the community through benevolent programs

What it reported doing in 2024

The benevolent and protective order of Elks of the United ststes of

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 45
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.7%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 70%; rating input score 70; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 70.5%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 43.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 260 of 260 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 21 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.