Lubbock Cotton Exchange

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750755090
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Lubbock, TX, USA
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,193
Expenses
$62,866
Assets
$368,864
Liabilities
$120

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYCE MIKESKA (President)
  • TAMMI CHOCK (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • BLAKE LORENZ (Director)
  • BRYCE MIKESKA (President)
  • URSULA CASWELL (Secretary/Treas)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose for which it is formed is to maintain a cotton exchange with powers to provide and maintain suitable rooms for the conduct of their business, and to establish and maintain uniformity in commercial usages in cities and towns; to acquire, preserve, and disseminate valuable business information; to adopt rules, regulations and standards of classification which shall govern all transactions connected with the cotton trade and with other commodities where standards and classifications are required; and generally to promote the interest of trade and increase the facilities of commercial transactions, in accordance with subdivision 53 of art. 1302. This corporation is not organized for profit and shall have no capital stock and no part of the net earnings, if any, shall enure to the benefit of any member thereof.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide training and education through the sponsorship of an annual school to train individuals about the world-wide cotton industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.3%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.87; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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 — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.