Wilkins Post No 37 The American Legion Department of California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946068334
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Phone
4154723445
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$53,701
Expenses
$35,457
Assets
$463,950
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Jim Von Bima (Treasurer): $2,475 total reported compensation
  • Al Springstead (Adjutant): $1,550 total reported compensation
  • Jim Von Bima (Assistant Adjutant): $1,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Form 990, part i, line 1, description of organization mission: to preserve the organization's mission for the great war. To inculcate a sense of individual obligations to the community, state and nation. To consecrate and sanctify our comradeship by our devotion to mutual helpfulness. To create a spirit of fraternity amongst its members and the association of those who are qualified for membership with the provisions of the constitution and by laws of the american legion. Form 990, part vi, section a line 2: father and son on board of directors form 990, part vi, section a, line 6: organization has 70 members, no stockholders form 990, part vi, section a, line 7a: entire organization approves officers form 990, part vi, section a, line 7b: see prior statement form 990, part vi, section c, line 20: jim von bima

What it reported doing in 2025

Sponsored area high school students to boys state. Donated to local charities such as uso, goodwill, society of st vincent de paul, blue stars moms of marin, san rafael santa cop, salvation army and wheelchair regatta for handicapped vets. Covered the cost for members for attendance to conferences, meetings and memorials.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 30%; rating input score 30; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 34%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.08; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $25K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 30/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.