Overland Park KS FOP Lodge 21
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311005098
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Overland Park, KS, USA
- Phone
- 8168060438
- Rating
- 43
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fraternal Societies
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $108,032
- Expenses
- $90,507
- Assets
- $432,626
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRETT GUMM (VICE PRESIDENT)
- LYNDSEY LORD (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- STEVE SAMMON (TREASURER)
- DIANNA JOHNSON (PESIDENT)
- BRETT GUMM (VICE PRESIDENT)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Overland park ks fop lodge 21 is committed to improving the working conditions of law enforcementofficers and the safety of those they serve through education, legislation, information, community involvement, and employeerepresentation. The lodge also pays for insurance and certain otherbenefits for its members, who are full-time law enforcement officerswith the city of overland park, Kansas.
What it reported doing in 2024
Improving the working conditions of law enforcement officers and the safety of those they serve through education, legislation, information, community involvement, and employee representation. Insurance and certain other benefits paid on behalf of members.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 3
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 5.3%; rating input score 5
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.2%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.78; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 5.3% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
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 5/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.