Agricultural Development Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
751824668
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8178772400
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$443,020
Expenses
$360,493
Assets
$1,632,550
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW R CARTER (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • CHARLIE ROYER III (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW R CARTER (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $511,578 total reported compensation
  • BRADFORD S BARNES PARTIAL YEAR (DIRECTOR): $416,431 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY DEWOODY PARTIAL YEAR (SECRETARY/TREASURER/DIRECTOR): $264,848 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the breeding of better livestock by exhibition and auction in connection with the southwestern exposition and livestock show.

What it reported doing in 2025

The fund was set up to pay premiums and bonuses to owners of livestock that show in the southwestern exposition and livestock show. Premiums are additional money paid on placings in the junior livestock shows. The bonus money is paid on a predetermined price per pound over market price for animals sold at the southwestern exposition and livestock show. Additionally, the fund provides grants for scholarships paid to Texas 4-h and ffa students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 18.6%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.53; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.4% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $350K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $512K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.