Lawrence County Country Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370379961
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lawrenceville, IL, USA
Phone
6189432011
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$363,177
Expenses
$383,163
Assets
$84,391
Liabilities
$13,559

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRUCE JONES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRUCE JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN POPE (DIRECTOR)
  • STEVE POTTS (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Operation of a golf course.

What it reported doing in 2025

The club holds a "lawrenceville open" golf tournament every year that is open to anyone in the club.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 62% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 3
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.6%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 3%; rating input score 3
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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; 64th 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: -5.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 69.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.6% of revenue deployed · 3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.