Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592767697
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Belleview, FL, USA
Phone
3522453535
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$118,213
Expenses
$152,350
Assets
$531,881
Liabilities
$190,608

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JIM KLYNMAN (Secretary): $1,475 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA LEPORE (Secretary): $1,475 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks

What it reported doing in 2014

Fraternal order of elks

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.49; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.