Ancient Free & Accepted Masons of Texas Plano Masonic Lodge 768 AF& AM

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237182862
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Plano, TX, USA
Phone
9723804900
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,558
Expenses
$24,417
Assets
$959,439
Liabilities
$513

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • John Colwell (Secretary): $200 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fraternal Organization

What it reported doing in 2024

Mirabeau B Lamar Scholarship ProgramMirabeau B. Lamar was born in 1798 in Georgia and was raised there on hisfather's farm. An insatiable reader, he was largely self-educated and becamevery proficient in writing, history, liberal arts, sciences, math, and art. It was here that Lamar joined the Masonic Lodge and developed his strong stance for humanliberty and public education. After a brief political career, he moved to Texas in1835 just as the Texas Revolution was starting. He served as a Colonel in theCavalry at the Battle of San Jacinto and was instrumental in this final battle forTexas Independence. In 1838, he was inaugurated as the second president ofTexas and in his very first address to the Texas Congress, President Lamarcalled for and had approved an appropriation of land in every Texas county tosupport public schools and 50 leagues of land that would eventually become theUniversity of Texas and Texas A&M University. For this, he became known asThe Father of Public Education in Texas.In honor of his distinguished contributions to the public education system ofTexas, the Mirabeau B. Lamar Award is presented to a Graduating Senior fromthe Plano Independent School District by Plano Masonic Lodge#768 of Ancient Free & Accepted Masons, Plano, Texas

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 program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.8%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 22.5%; rating input score 23
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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 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: 53.5%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 39.29; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 57.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.8% of revenue deployed · 22.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 15/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.