Jacques Demolay Commandery 4

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237619542
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Eldersburg, MD, USA
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$103,603
Expenses
$31,959
Assets
$1,263,480
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • David Hahn (Captain General)
  • Robert Koons (Commander)
  • Dakota Clark (Generalissimo)

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 Knights Templar is a Christian-oriented fraternal organization that was founded in the 11th century. They support the Knights Templar Eye Foundation, KT Holy Land Pilgrimage, KT Educational Foundation and donate to various charities, masonic organizations and youth groups.

What it reported doing in 2025

On December 4, 2025 Jacques DeMolay Commandery 4 hosted a Christmas Observance. Total expenses included $24,900 in Charitable Contributions to the following organizations: 1. $1900. Shephard and Enoch Pratt Hospital 2. $2000. Charles E Hartman Scholarship 3. $2000. Frederick Health Hospice 4. $2000. Frederick Rescue Mission 5. $2000. Fisher House Foundation 6. $2000. Knight Templar Eye Foundation 7. $2000. OES No. 79 8. $1000. Frederick American Little League 9. $4000. The Mighty 30 10.$1000. Wilmer Eye Institute 11.$2000. Beyond Shelter Frederick 12.$1000. Frederick Order of Demolay 13.$2000. Hope4Kids Backpack Ministry

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 91
  • Growth: 60

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: 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: 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: 69.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 39.53; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 108 of 108 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.