Advocates for Camp Able Camp Able of Buffalo Gap
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 465250648
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Buffalo Gap, TX, USA
- Phone
- 3252805503
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,022,075
- Expenses
- $730,700
- Assets
- $3,459,267
- Liabilities
- $12,845
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Cody Cox (Executive Dir.): $82,268 total reported compensation
- Renee Hicks (Founder/Instr): $41,040 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Camp Able of Buffalo Gap is dedicated to empowering individuals with special needs through therapeutic riding and inclusive skill-based programs.
What it reported doing in 2024
Shelter and care of equines (excluding training) - During 2024 Camp Able cared for a total of sixty-nine equines, most of which were donated to Camp Able due to injury, age, lack of available riders or financial distress of owners. Thirty of these equines were adopted out to loving owners and nine passed away, mostly due to old age. The goal for the remaining thirty horses is to use as many as possible in therapeutic horsemanship programs. Those that do not pass the stringent evaluation to be part of the therapy herd are adopted out or cared for during the remainder of their natural existence. Shelter and care expenses include feed, veterinary care, farrier and all the supporting costs of personnel, transportation, equipment, facilities maintenance, physical shelter and supplies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 54
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.3%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $89.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.73; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 67.3% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $693K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.