Oc Wrangler Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752956747
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Odessa, TX, USA
Phone
4323356574
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,937
Expenses
$17,782
Assets
$264,542
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOMMY CLARK (PRESIDENT)
  • JUDY MONDY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ZACH STOKES (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LES LITTLEJOHN (DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID TURNER (DIRECTOR)
  • THOMAS BLACKSTONE (DIRECTOR)

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the oc wrangler club is: 1. To support the intercollegiate athletic programs of odessa college by providing financial and/or other tangible resources in the form of scholarship assistance for student athletes, equipment and/or facilities in support of individual or all sports, travel assistance for athletic staff or student recruits, or other special needs as circumstances may indicate. 2. To make the community aware of the unique community contributions provided by the intercollegiate athletic programs of odessa college and to encourage local support of competitive events in the form of fan participation and financial contributions. 3. To insure that all activities and programs of the oc wrangler club are in compliance with njcaa rules & regulations. 4. To work in a spirit of cooperation with the board of trustees and administration of odessa college to insure that all activiites of the oc wrangler club reflect positively on the college and its mission.

What it reported doing in 2025

Make the community aware of the unique contributions provided by the intercollegiate athletic programs of odessa college & encourage local support of events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.88; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $16K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.