La Sertoma International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
440627022
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Lanexa, VA, USA
Phone
8045103991
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,463
Expenses
$29,461
Assets
$80,228
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Helen Williston (International President)
  • Shirley Claypool (Vice President)
  • Beverly Murphy (Second Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Helen Williston (International President)
  • Deborah Ravestein (Chairman of the Board)
  • Shirley Claypool (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

LaSertoma International focuses on youth and community needs person to person assistance, and scholarships to be awarded at the annual meeting/convention.

What it reported doing in 2024

LaSertoma International Awarded 15 Scholarships to High School Seniors in July 2025 under the separate 501c3 Organization affiliated with LaSertoma International (LaSertoma International Scholarship & Memorial) A separate return outlining the grants is filed separately. Additionally this year, two Teacher Grants $500 and one Teacher Scholarship $1000 were awarded under the Fred J and Julia C Kuehne program with Investment Income.

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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.72; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.