Edgewood American Legion Keeler Adams Post 1168

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
376046306
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Edgewood, IL, USA
Phone
6182384193
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$423,273
Expenses
$234,744
Assets
$499,716
Liabilities
$4,228

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRANDI PARKS (EMPLOYEE): $23,089 total reported compensation
  • CHARITY HIGGS (FINANCE OFFICER): $2,009 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote socialization and financial assistance to members of the armed forces, promote patriotism be a community service organization

What it reported doing in 2020

Facilitate socialization of veterans and their families, assist disabled and needy veterans , promote patritism, provide community support

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $23K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.