Mental Health Resource of Texas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464931600
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5129538160
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$853,915
Expenses
$879,863
Assets
$222,963
Liabilities
$22,709

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John K Waddell (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Reginald Smith (Programs Director): $63,542 total reported compensation
  • John K Waddell (Chief Executive Officer): $59,256 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 provide education, training, and consultation to individuals in recovery with experience of mental health conditions, their family members, youth who are interested in mental health, and mental health professionals.

What it reported doing in 2025

Peer Specialist Certification Training by peers for peers in the following disciplines: Mental Health Peer Specialist (MHPS), Re-Entry Peer Specialist (RPS), Peer Specialist Supervisor (PSS), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Training Grant, Libraries 4 Health (L4H), TDCJ Training Partnership, Peer Support Core Training, Peer Specialist Registered Apprenticeship Program in partnership with the US Department of Labor (DOL) and the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC), International Re-Entry Peer Specialist Certification with Via Hope as the certifying body.

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: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $153.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th 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: 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.4% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $670K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.