Tuckahoe-Richmond Moose Lodge 1163

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540611321
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Glen Allen, VA, USA
Phone
8045271731
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$726,064
Expenses
$676,869
Assets
$1,218,412
Liabilities
$108,816

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joe Lamb Jr (President)
  • Stephen Pemberton (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sherri Adams (Administrator)
  • Joe Lamb Jr (President)
  • Stephen Pemberton (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

Fraternalism, Benevolence and Charity

What it reported doing in 2025

The Lodge unites its Members in the bonds of Fraternity, Benevolence, and Charity. This is accomplished through a year round schedule of social and recreational activities for members and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 70% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - Program spending has grown recently. 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.8%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: 6.8%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.8% of revenue deployed · 50.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1109 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.