Better Business Bureau of Southeast Texas Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741466379
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Beaumont, TX, USA
Phone
4098355340
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$829,704
Expenses
$851,524
Assets
$1,313,373
Liabilities
$559,409

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARREN ERWIN (PRESIDENT AN)

Highest reported compensation

  • DARREN ERWIN (PRESIDENT AN): $132,543 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 be the leader in advancing marketplace trust through: creating a community of trustworthy businesses; setting standards for marketplace trust; encouraging and supporting best practices; celebrating marketplace role models; and denouncing substandard marketplace behavior.

What it reported doing in 2025

The better business bureau of southeast Texas serves the following areas of southeast Texas: chambers, hardin, jasper, jefferson, liberty, newton, orange and tyler countries, and the bolivar peninsula. The bbb greatly helps consumers and businesses by working with businesses to maximize customer satisfaction and resolving marketplace disputes, by informing the public of applicable laws and refering those needing it to legal assistance, by assisting in cases of misrepresentation or fraud, by providing important consumer information and education, and by providing lists of accredited businesses that have pledged to follow bbb standards.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 52.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $449K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $133K · 31 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.