Fraternal Beneficial Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910829170
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Fairfield, WA, USA
Phone
5093684834
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,788
Expenses
$162,890
Assets
$3,536,107
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DAVE BAUMGARTNER PRESIDENT (GENESSEE, ID)
  • JOE SCHMITZ 1ST VICE PRESIDENT (ROSALIA, WA)
  • LINDA FLAIG SECRETARY (FAIRFIELD, WA)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide fire loss coverage for members, eligibility being a farmer in eastern Washington or northern Idaho, from an accumulated investment fund maintained from annual member assessments of covered property and fund investment income.

What it reported doing in 2020

Expense revenue fire loss payments $ 45,000 member assessments/fees $ 55,717 investing expense $ 53,940 net investment income $ 29,046 admin expense $ 63,950 other revenue $ 25 total expense $162,890 total revenue $ 84,788

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -92.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.71; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $163K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.