Sequim Prairie Grange

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237136387
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Sequim, WA, USA
Phone
3608087876
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fraternal Beneficiary Societies

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,498
Expenses
$65,465
Assets
$819,563
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DORINDA BECKER (President)

People named in this filing

  • DORINDA BECKER (President)
  • TOM SUTTON (OVERSEER)
  • KIM MOULSON (LECTURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting family, farm & community life

What it reported doing in 2024

Our grange supported family & education by giving scholarships to support students education

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 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15.7%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 44
  • 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; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.9%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.52; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 63.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -131.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.7% of revenue deployed · 43.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 16/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.