Miami County Moose Lodge 2611

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421548548
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Troy, OH, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Fraternal Beneficiary Societies

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$129,605
Expenses
$130,312
Assets
$4,009
Liabilities
$358

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Loyal order of moose lodge 2611

What it reported doing in 2010

The purposes of said fraternal and charitable logdes chapters and other units are to unite in the bonds of fraternity benevolence and charity all aceptable persons of good character to educate and improve their members and the families of their members socially morally and intellectually to assist their members and their families in time of need to aid and assist the aged members of the said lodges and their wives to encourage and educate their members in patriotism and ob edience to the laws of the country in which such lodge or others units exist and to encourage tolerance of every kind to render particular service to orphaned or dependent children by operation of one or more vocational educational institutio ns of the type and character of the institution now called mooseheart and located at mooseheart in the state of Illinois to serve aged members and their wives in a special and unusual way at one or more institutions of th

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 77% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $130K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.