International Association of Lions Clubs 4C6 District
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 770324761
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- San Jose, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4083548500
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Service Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $184,206
- Expenses
- $54,595
- Assets
- $184,202
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Thelma Batilo (Vice Dist. Gov.)
- Richard Silveria (Dist. Governor)
- Allen King (Vice Dist. Gove)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To Organize, charter and supervise service clubs to be known as Lions clubs.To Coordinate the activities and standardize the administration of Lions clubs.To Create and foster a spirit of understanding among the peoples of the world.To Promote the principles of good government and good citizenship.To Take an active interest in the civic, cultural, social and moral welfare of the community.To Unite the clubs in the bonds of friendship, good fellowship and mutual understanding.To Provide a forum for the open discussion of all matters of public interest; provided, however, that partisan politics and sectarian religion shall not be debated by club members.To Encourage service-minded people to serve their community without personal financial reward, and to encourage efficiency and promote high ethical standards in commerce, industry, professions, public works and private endeavors.
What it reported doing in 2020
Publish directories of members' contact information and club level activities & calendar of events. Directories are provided to members only.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 8
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 4.1%; rating input score 4
- Program expense ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 14
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 70.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.37; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -25.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 68.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 4.1% of revenue deployed · 13.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $8K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2016 to 2020
- 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 4/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.