Washington State Grange

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237564090
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Cle Elum, WA, USA
Phone
4253592944
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,182
Expenses
$71,164
Assets
$362,998
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES ROSENBERRY (PRESIDENT)
  • JANE BATOR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANE BATOR (PRESIDENT)
  • DONNA CAROLLO (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLES ROSENBERRY (PRESIDENT)
  • JANE BATOR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTINE JOHNSON (SECRETARY)

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

A nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving the quality of life within our community through the spirit of community service with a grass roots agricultural focus.

What it reported doing in 2025

We offer educational forums for our community, such as prescribed burning education, cpr training and we host a book club. We do not charge for these events and we do not incur expenses to hold them. This is a service we provide the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.8%; rating input score 93; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -86.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.1; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 9 of 11 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • 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.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.