American Wagyu Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481110644
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
2082628100
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,668,234
Expenses
$2,010,741
Assets
$661,493
Liabilities
$412,714

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY A CASSADY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ADAM WACKEL (VICE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY)
  • CADE NICHOLS (PRESIDENT)
  • ROGER OSINCHUK (VICE PRESIDENT AND TREASURER)
  • KYLE JURNEY (VICE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY)
  • PAMELA ARMSTRONG (VICE PRESIDENT AND TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JERRY A CASSADY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $250,000 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 provide programs and services empowering members; to advance the popularity, quality, and value of Wagyu and Wagyu-influenced cattle; to protect the integrity of the herd book and related data; and to expand domestic and global demand for Wagyu cattle.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Organization includes farmers and ranchers throughout the U.S., Australia, Mexico and Canada. The members benefit by interaction and sharing of vital information for the improvement of the wagyu breed of cattle.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors 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
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.