Bpoe Lodge 1324

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810110614
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Glendive, MT, USA
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,214
Expenses
$112,371
Assets
$2,222,536
Liabilities
$1,456,454

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • GREGORY SADORF (TRUSTEE)
  • ALEX RIVAS (TRUSTEE)
  • JESS JOHNSON (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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fraternal organization & charity

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Affiliate network. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending through affiliated organizations.

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: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.4%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 8
  • 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; 64th 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: -47.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.78; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 11.4% of revenue deployed · 7.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2021
  • 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 11/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.