Central Texas Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742681873
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Taylor, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5123523565
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $22,531
- Expenses
- $119,475
- Assets
- $13,764
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RON MORRISON (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- RON MORRISON (PRESIDENT)
- JEFF MUEGGE (VICE-PRESIDE)
- WILLIAM PINA (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To act as the coordinating organization for members to educate the people living in the area, to accelerate the conservation, development and wise use of natural and related resources within the area, and to help secure financial, technical, and educational assistance to plan and implement measures accepted into the rc & d area plan.
What it reported doing in 2014
Impemented the council's plans to act as the coordinating organization for members to educate the people in the area, to accelerate the conservation, development and wise use of natural resources in the area, and to help secure financial, technical, and educational assistance to plan and implement measures accepted into the rc & d area plan by returning idle funds of 77,665.23 to the Texas association of rc&d councils to comply with their current policy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 11
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -430.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -34.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $100K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.