Society of American Military Engineers Sacramento Postc/o Usacesacto Division

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946107627
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164445825
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$139,858
Expenses
$132,588
Assets
$309,859
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW ALIX (PRESIDENT)
  • GUY GRAENING (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JORDAN OLLANIK (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT GABLE (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW ALIX (PRESIDENT)
  • GUY GRAENING (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JORDAN OLLANIK (1ST 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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To bring together professional engineers and those in engineering-related fields to improve and increase the engineering capabilities of the nation and to exchange and advance the knowledge of engineering technologies, applications, and practices.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community service donations to organizations, programs or activities that efficiently support causes similar to those considered by the sacramento post throughout the greater sacramento community, specifically programs that advance the study of mathematics and science to economically disadvantaged elementary and high school students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75.2%; rating input score 75; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.34; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $122K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.