Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks Williamson Wv

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
550312854
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Williamson, WV, USA
Phone
3042351919
Rating
28
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fraternal Societies

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,668
Expenses
$55,378
Assets
$139,424
Liabilities
$10,307

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERNIE NEW (PRESIDENT)
  • LARRY ROSEN (V-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BOBBY HINKLE (TRUSTEE)
  • MARY K ADKINS (TRUSTEE)
  • ERNIE NEW (PRESIDENT)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The lodge makes various contributions to local charities throughout the year. Also holiday meals are provided for the less fortunate in the area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 80
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 38
  • 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th 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; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.52; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 13 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.