Pana Country Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370452027
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Pana, IL, US
Phone
(217) 562-2641
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$157,466
Expenses
$153,235
Assets
$114,571
Liabilities
$55,142

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Burris (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • JI McDowell (Pres. / Treas.)
  • Scott Burris (Vice President)
  • Bambi Kimbrel (Secretary)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide a welcoming, community-focused environment for our approximately 125 active members, offering a top-notch golf experience and a wide range of social events and activities.

What it reported doing in 2016

Private 9 hole golf course with restaurant and pro-shop.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 12
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.