Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5 Charitable Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203124928
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2156293600
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$303,626
Expenses
$386,402
Assets
$274,862
Liabilities
$248

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROOSEVELT POPLAR (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROOSEVELT POPLAR (PRESIDENT): $248,824 total reported compensation
  • NICK DENOFA (VICE PRESIDE): $221,450 total reported compensation
  • JOHN MC GRODY (VICE PRESIDE): $205,621 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To memorialize police officers who were killed in the line of duty and to provide financial, spiritual, and mental support for the families of police officers who have incurred grave incidents

What it reported doing in 2024

Informant reward program to reward informants for their help locating criminals involved in the murder of police officers. Court attendance expenses to accomodate the families of officers killed to appear at trials of perpetrators. Distribution of bibles to families of deceased police officers. Scholarship fund.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 49.6%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 49.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $192K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.