Lions Clubs International

Legal name: Lions Clubs International Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237030455
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Oak Brook, IL, USA
Phone
+1 (630) 57-7626
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,311,308
Expenses
$60,083,161
Assets
$448,506,815
Liabilities
$13,135,517

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Fabricio Oliveira (LCI International President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rebecca Daou (LCIF Executive Administrator): $344,922 total reported compensation
  • Christopher Plunkett (Division Manager, LCIF Development): $172,875 total reported compensation
  • KaSondra Byrd (Division Manager, Global Grants): $166,731 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To empower Lions clubs, volunteers, and partners to improve health and well-being, strengthen communities, and provide relief to those affected by disasters worldwide.

What it reported doing in 2024

Humanitarian - Through LCIF's matching grant and district and club community impact grant, Lions can support humanitarian activities and initiatives. LCIF's humanitarian grants empower Lions to address unmet health needs and support at-risk, vulnerable populations around the world. LCIF's humanitarian funding also supports partnership efforts such as vision screenings and programs for athletes through the Special Olympics Opening Eyes partnership and school-based feeding programs through the World Food Program USA.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.7%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.46; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 69.6% of revenue deployed · 71.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $43.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $345K · 29 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.5M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 39 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 145 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 138 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.