Heritage Association of San Marcos

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741907674
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Marcos, TX, USA
Phone
5123963300
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,677
Expenses
$52,138
Assets
$209,769
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RUSSELL CLARK (PRESIDENT EL)
  • RENEE GRAHAM (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SHERRY BAEBLER (HERITAGE GUI)
  • MICHELE BREIHAN (TREASURER)
  • RUSSELL CLARK (PRESIDENT EL)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the preservation of historic buildings and the perpetuation of local traditions that beautify and enrich the cultural and community life of san marcos, Texas.

What it reported doing in 2024

General programs include educational events for the public, membership meetings with an educational focus, and membership drives. Beautification of veramendi park is overseen each year by the association's riverwalk park committee. Projects include the planting of trees, repairs to the park's gazebo, installation of park benches and trash cans, and sales of personalized bricks in several areas of the park. The charles s. Cock house, the eli t. Merriman cabin, and the gwen smith memorial fountain are among the sites located on the park grounds.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $109.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 27.3%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.02; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.1% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.