Mankato Lodge No 12 Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of Mn

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237147315
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Mankato, MN, USA
Phone
5073872665
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$145,502
Expenses
$87,814
Assets
$674,502
Liabilities
$1,589

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL KREDIET (MASTER)
  • ROSS GULLICKSON (SR WARDEN)
  • NICK WININGS (JR WARDEN)

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

The purpose of mankato lodge no. 12 is to continue, to maintain, and to conduct the subordinate lodge of ancient free and accepted masons in accordance with the charter granted to said subordinate lodge by the grand lodge of ancient free and accepted masons of Minnesota under date of july 6, 1857.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mankato lodge no. 12 continued to acheive the basic purpose of masonry which is to make "better men out of good men". Meetings were held to educate its members about the principles of personal responsibility and righteousness, understanding of and feeling for freemasonry's character and how to put these lessons into practice in their daily life. The mankato lodge serves about 150 members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, 16% for grants, and 6% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.9%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.6%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.68; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 32.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.9% of revenue deployed · 74.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.