Sons of Norway District Lodge 1

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410459935
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Vadnais Heights, MN, USA
Phone
6512767226
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$117,344
Expenses
$63,516
Assets
$1,569,807
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK HAUGEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK HAUGEN (PRESIDENT): $2,500 total reported compensation
  • JERRY WRIGHT (VICE PRESIDE): $2,500 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN TOWNSEND (SECRETARY &): $2,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sons of norway is dedicated to preserving and promoting norwegian heritage. The local lodges and international headquarters work to meet cultural, heritage and financial needs.

What it reported doing in 2025

Youth: this program shares the norwegian cultural richness with young people and gets them involved at a young age. It aims to make sons of norway a priority in our children's lives by sharing with them a variety of programs developed within the district. There are currently 3 youth dance groups. Scholarships: district 1 offers scholarships to adult members, children of members, and grandchildren of members. There are many scholarships available for youth interested in increasing their knowledge of nordic languages and heritage. This year the scholarship committee reviewed five adult scholarship applications submitted by four applicants. A total of 1488.00 was awarded in adult scholarships to attend various cultural learning activities such as language learning, norway p norsk (a language and cultural event in norway), and folk art classes about rosmaling.

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 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 71
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.8%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 46.6%; rating input score 47; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 78.9%; rating input score 79; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.72; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.7%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.8% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 19 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $52K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 59/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.