American Quarter Horse Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510187823
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Amarillo, TX, USA
Phone
8063765181
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,735,820
Expenses
$2,847,931
Assets
$78,259,679
Liabilities
$473,269

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES HUNT (PRESIDENT (TO 3/2025))
  • KARL STRESSMAN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARL STRESSMAN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $687,871 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW BARBE (CFO & TREASURER): $508,851 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE SITZ (COO & SECRETARY): $226,495 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation connects horses and people through charitable giving to support programs that preserve our horses legacy and further the well-being of the american quarter horse family.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hall of fame and museum - the museum mission is to steward and preserve the history and legacy of the american quarter horse and educate our diverse audience. The hall of fame honors those humans and horses that have made a transformational impact upon aqha and the american quarter horse industry. Both horse and human inductees should have made a historically significant influence upon their respective fields or disciplines, and the horse should have shown great accomplishment in those areas. The lives of human inductees should reflect their enduring influence upon their field or discipline, and should show the highest level of character and integrity.

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 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.4%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 63.2%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 27.48; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.4% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $688K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $225K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.