Benevolent Protective Order of Elks

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930440674
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Myrtle Creek, OR, USA
Phone
5418631943
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$208,139
Expenses
$197,320
Assets
$254,732
Liabilities
$62,031

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TED ROMAS (TRUSTEE)
  • RAY DEAN (TRUSTEE)
  • JEFF OHMON (TRUSTEE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community service and scholarships

What it reported doing in 2025

Christmas food boxes including toys. This program helped 550 people during the holidays, partnering with local fire departments. Youth halloween carnival to provide a safe fun activity. Support local youth, americanism flag program and veterans. College scholarships to 13 recipients. Sleep in heavenly peace supported.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.6%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 20
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.5%; rating input score 91; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.6% of revenue deployed · 20.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 31/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.