Pokegama Lake Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411516320
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Pine City, MN, USA
Phone
6122097862
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$218,503
Expenses
$130,006
Assets
$628,457
Liabilities
$3,644

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JIM NIELSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT WASTE (PRESIDENT)
  • MARIETTA JACOBSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHY NIELSEN (SECRETARY): $2,700 total reported compensation
  • ROBERTA EICH (TREASURER): $2,700 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 promote the protection and improvement of pokegama lake. To educate local residents and students on lake ecology and preservation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Gambling: the forms of gambling conducted by the organization during the year ended 12/31/2024, included paper pull-tabs, non-linked bingo, paddletickets, tipboards, sports-themed tipboards, electronic pull-tabs, and linked bingo. Revenue in excess of allowable expenses generated by the lawful gambling fund were used for lawful purposes and board approved expenditures as defined by Minnesota statute. Gross receipts for the year eneded 12/31/2024 were 5,232,174 total gaming expenses for the year ended 12/31/2024 were 5,226,734.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.7%; rating input score 80; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.83; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $115K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.