American Legion

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
740651419
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bryan, TX, USA
Phone
9797781936
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,651
Expenses
$184,670
Assets
$1,662,749
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Dale Hutchcraft (Commander)
  • Susan Marty (Trustee)
  • Roger Smith (Honor Guard Captain)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Veterans organization committed to mentoring youth and sponsoring wholesome programs in our community advocating patriotism and honor, promoting strong national security and devoting to fellow veterans through financial, social, and emotional support.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants and other Assistance to Domestic Organizations: $415 in donations to the VA Clinic in College Station, TX to provide water for Veterans and their families. $2,400 donation to support the American Legion Auxiliary programs, $900 donation to the American Legion Legacy Scholarship in honor of those veterans who passed in the year and were members of the post, $3,598 donation to Boy Scout Troop #159 to cover their charter.

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

REVIEW - Total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. 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: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.5%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 33
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 32.3%; rating input score 32; 15th 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: 1.1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.5% of revenue deployed · 32.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 31 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $61K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 17 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 33/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.