The Society of American Military Engineers -- Los Angeles Post
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 956096021
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Burbank, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2136052250
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $28,676
- Expenses
- $16,764
- Assets
- $39,601
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Stephen Brooks (President)
- Nicole Tapia (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Stephen Brooks (President)
- Nicole Tapia (Vice President)
- Wendy Campos (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide Readiness of Private Sector Engineering Community to support the military engineering needs in times of emergency. Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) is a nonprofit professional engineering association, headquartered in Alexandria, Virgina. The Los Angeles Post is one of the 149 posts (Chapters) located throughout the United States and overseas. SAME was founded in 1920 to engage military and federal government engineers with those in the private sector for the purpose of improving the engineering potential of the United States. The Society today has approximately 27,000 individual members and 3,200 sustaining members from industry, miliary, and government organizations and academia. There are also approximately 650 student members in 81 active student posts. The mission of the Post is to promote and facilitate engineering support for national security by developing and enhancing relationships and competency among uniformed services, public and private sector enginee
What it reported doing in 2024
Scholarships granted to students
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 41.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.36; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 5 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 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.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.