Jesse C Lynch Memorial Post No 71 The American Legion Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
576021978
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
North Augusta, SC, USA
Phone
8033419552
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,566
Expenses
$129,966
Assets
$605,725
Liabilities
$31

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILIP HOMAN - POST COMMANDER (President)
  • DONALD JENKINS - 1ST VICE (Vice President)
  • DANIEL FISKE 3RD VICE (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • PHILIP HOMAN - POST COMMANDER (President)
  • RON PRICE - FINANCE OFFICER (Treasurer)
  • DONALD JENKINS - 1ST VICE (Vice President)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Veteran services, youth services, and community service

What it reported doing in 2024

Veteran services including, but not limited to: support to charlie norwood va medical center, including specific support to recreational services for veterans, personnel support to a post service office at the va medical center, providing honor guard and military honors for numerous veteran burials and memorial services, conduit for vital veteran information provided through email, newsletters, phone calls and meetings. Youth services including, but not limited to: support various junior rotc operations at local schools, providing vital school supplies to elementary schools, interviewing, selecting, and funding delegates for american legion boys' state, and support to local girls softball

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -51.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.66; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.