Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks of the USA 2153 Port Charlotte

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591392631
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Port Charlotte, FL, USA
Phone
9416294545
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$161,834
Expenses
$208,119
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL TIRPAK (SECRETARY): $4,615 total reported compensation
  • JOHN DEROCHE (LEADING KNIG): $3,762 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH DANKANYIN (TREASURER): $3,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fraternal organization which was founded on the principals of charity, justice, brotherly love, fidelity, and belief in god.

What it reported doing in 2017

Operates under the lodge system for the exclusive benefit of its members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 57%; rating input score 57
  • 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -33.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.3% of revenue deployed · 57% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.