Selma Alabama Lodge #167 Bpoe

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630185545
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Selma, AL, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,776
Expenses
$50,361
Assets
$22,145
Liabilities
$35,839

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

People named in this filing

  • J ANTHONY DRAIME (EXALTED RULER)
  • BARRY ANDERSON (LEADINGKNIGHT)
  • DARYL SMITH (LOYAL KNIGHT)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fraternal and charity

What it reported doing in 2015

Provide educational scholarship assistance to individuals and to provide financial assistance to local charities and veterans

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 17.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.62; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.