Austin Steam Train Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742553832
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Cedar Park, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5129153010
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Historical Societies & Historic Preservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,310,594
- Expenses
- $1,650,173
- Assets
- $968,901
- Liabilities
- $283,373
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROBERT SCHOEN (President)
- ZENA VAUGHN (Executive Director)
- ALYSSA J LOPEZ (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- ROBERT SCHOEN (President)
- BEN SARGENT (Cochairman)
- BRIAN SMITH (Board Member)
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 mission of the Austin steam train association is to preserve, and recreate the first-hand experience of the historic railroading for thhe enjoyment and edification of today's families and
What it reported doing in 2025
Arts, Culture and Humanities: carried approximately 20,070 passengers since the inception through the hill country and downtown Austin on historic railroad equipment. Educated the population about the histori importance of the rail line we operate, maintain and refurbish. We maintain numerous historic locomotives and coach rail cars.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.9%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 48%; rating input score 48
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -25.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 64.9% of revenue deployed · 48% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.