Southwark Hose Co No 9

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231107800
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Catasauqua, PA, USA
Phone
6102641641
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$119,963
Expenses
$97,803
Assets
$269,707
Liabilities
$1,819

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID REED (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS MATHEWS (TRUSTEE): $20,280 total reported compensation
  • DAVID REED (PRESIDENT): $13,260 total reported compensation
  • MATHEW EISENHARD (FINANCIAL SE): $10,088 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Manage a social club, whose proceeds are spent to maintain and insure the buildings and property.

What it reported doing in 2019

Manage a social club

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.76; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 211 of 211 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.