Minnesota Masonic Charities

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411495325
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bloomington, MN, USA
Phone
9529487000
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,538,629
Expenses
$31,165,792
Assets
$29,117,580
Liabilities
$68,560,346

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN SCHWIETZ (CEO - CHARITIES)
  • ERIC J NEETENBEEK (PRESIDENT - CHARITIES)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN SCHWIETZ (CEO - CHARITIES): $403,013 total reported compensation
  • SUE MORK THRU SEPTEMBER 2024 (CFO - CHARITIES): $265,142 total reported compensation
  • ERIC J NEETENBEEK (PRESIDENT - CHARITIES): $217,612 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Minnesota masonic charities and affiliates' primary purposes are to help, aid and assist the masonic family and others, guided by the masonic principles of brotherly love, relief and truth, by (a) providing financial or other assistance to non-profit tax exempt entities that provide facilities for nursing care and elderly housing; facilities and programs for community, health, social services and education of the elderly; (b) promoting research and activities related to the treatment and cure of cancer, childhood language disorders, physical, emotional and mental maladies of the youth; (c) assisting students in obtaining higher education; (d) the collection, preservation and dissemination of historical knowledge about masonry in Minnesota; and (e) to engage in, advance, support, promote, and administer charitable causes and projects that aid, assist, and contribute to the support of corporations, trusts, associations, and foundations that are exempt from federal income taxes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $75.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -130.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.35; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $403K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $159K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 37 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 36 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.