American Fisheries Society Texas Chapter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521069108
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
San Marcos, TX, USA
Phone
5127546844
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,504
Expenses
$81,443
Assets
$633,425
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALICE BEST (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • STEVEN BARDIN (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA PERKIN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALICE BEST (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • STEVEN BARDIN (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA PERKIN (PRESIDENT)

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 Texas chapter of the american fisheries society is committed to the conservation, development, and wise utilization of recreational and commercial fisheries, promotion of all branches of fisheries science and practice, and exchange and dissemination of knowledge about fish, fisheries, and related subjects.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tcafs hosts an annual meeting where fisheries professionals and students can meet to exchange and disseminate information through presentations, attend continuing education workshops, and celebrate awards and accomplishments of members from the previous year. In 2025, tcafs hosted our annual meeting in college station with approximately 300 attendees. Oral and poster presentations were given, student scholarships were distributed, and student travel awards were distributed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.1%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 66.3%; rating input score 66; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.78; rating input score 86; 86th 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: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.1% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • 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.