American Legion Post 114

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431171831
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sikeston, MO, USA
Phone
5734719956
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$128,110
Expenses
$138,222
Assets
$405,326
Liabilities
$4,023

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • FRANKIE ADAMS (COMMANDER)
  • CLIFTON BURN (SGT@ARMS)
  • ED CARR (ADJUTANT)

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

The american legion is a war veterans' organization whose purposes are: 1)to promote the social welfare needs of the community, 2)assist needy and disabled veterans and widows and orphans of deceased veterans, 3)provide entertainment, care and assistance to hospitalized veterans, 4)perpetuate the memory of veterans and comfort their survivors, 5)sponsor or participate in patriotic activities, 6)conduct programs for charitable purposes, 7)provide insurance benefits to members and/or their dependents, and 8)provide social and recreational activities for members.

What it reported doing in 2025

Interest income & advertising profit are used to further the patriotic aims of the post.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 82% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 44.8%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42% of revenue deployed · 44.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.