Free and Accepted Masons Riviera Lodge No 780

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
956295088
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Santa Monica, CA, USA
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Domestic Fraternal Societies

Reported finances

Revenue
$161,509
Expenses
$114,322
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Grafton S Harper (Secretary): $12,500 total reported compensation
  • Olin M Matson (Tiler): $3,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A man who strives to improve himself can also improve his community and the world at large. This is the mission of the Masons of California. Through Masonic principles and tradition, we foster personal growth and improve the lives of others.

What it reported doing in 2017

Freemasonry in California is a relevant and respected organization - both inside and outside of the fraternity. Through our culture of Philanthropy, we make a profound difference in the lives of our members and in California communities. We are engaged in the worldwide principles and fellowship of Freemasonry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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: 92
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 40

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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 29.2%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.