Marshall County Elks Lodge Inc No 2707

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611094309
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Benton, KY, USA
Phone
2705595818
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$702,973
Expenses
$565,696
Assets
$877,841
Liabilities
$28,247

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DORA CARLSON (TRUSTEE)
  • SHAWN HOWARD (TRUSTEE)
  • PAM VAN (TRUSTEE)

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

To inclucate the principles of charity, justice, brotherly love and fidelity; to recognize a belief in god; to promote the welfare and enhance the happiness of its members; to quicken the spirit of american patriotism; to cultivate good fellowship; to perpetuate itself as a fraternal organization, and to provide for its government, the benevolent and protective order of the elks of the united states of america will serve the people and ommunities through benevolent programs, demonstrating the elks care and elks share.

What it reported doing in 2025

Fraternal beneficiary society operating under the lodge system for the exclusive benefit of the members

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 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: 68
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

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: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 54.6%; rating input score 55; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 19.5%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 15 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.