Legion of Guardsmen Post 2

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
550766717
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Wheeling, WV, USA
Phone
3042427899
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$122,557
Expenses
$121,456
Assets
$13,212
Liabilities
$8,512

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS ESPOSITO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS ESPOSITO (PRESIDENT): $19,380 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Service nbsp; to nbsp; member nbsp; veterans nbsp; and nbsp; other nbsp; agencies nbsp; in nbsp; the nbsp; service nbsp; of nbsp; veterans nbsp; and nbsp; families

What it reported doing in 2016

Distribution of profits to help veterans and members

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 81% 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

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

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: 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Missing
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -59.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 60 of 60 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $19K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.