Knights of Columbus Council 6192

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470659459
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Bellevue, NE, USA
Phone
4022916887
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Fraternal Beneficiary Societies
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$122,949
Expenses
$156,135
Assets
$716,877
Liabilities
$7,875

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Ray F Romero Sr (GRAND KNIGHT)
  • Michael J Cook (TREASURER)
  • John Hacker (SECRETARY)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

COUNCIL 6192 Kinghts of Columbus raises and distributes funds for worthwile chairtable purposes includingSpecial Olimpics, St Marys School/Parish Bellevue Ne, Bellevue Right to life, A womans touch, Provides scholorships to catholic schools and college students, conducts road cleanups, maintains a handicap aids bank, assists Bellevue Senior Center, Juvinal Diabetes, and other civic projects

What it reported doing in 2016

Special olympics

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.59; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 493 of 493 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.