Knights of Columbus Council 2160

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237107789
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greeley, CO, USA
Phone
9704057794
Rating
23
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,997
Expenses
$98,235
Assets
$117,064
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • David Sauter (Trustee)
  • Joseph Wasung (Trustee)
  • Ronald Johnson (Trustee)

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

Council 2160 of the Knights of Columbus is a fraternal organization that supports the activities of three Greeley area Catholic churches at the request of pastors of each church. The Knights exhibit the principles of charity, unity and fraternity in conducting activities that support the church, family and community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Council supports three parishes in the Greeley area by supplying food and manpower for annual fund-raising events during each parish's festival. The parishes will also request physical and financial support for specific needs. The Council takes out an ad in each parish's bulletin to help with the cost of the bulletin. One parish supports outreach to students at University of Northern Colorado. The Greeley area churches serve approximately 5,500 families. The funds raised help each parish's mission in providing for the religious and social needs of their members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 88% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 strongest available result is that 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: 59
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 45
  • 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: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 30.9%; rating input score 31; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: -8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 13 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.