Oregon Cattlemens Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930381128
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Salem, OR, USA
Phone
5033618941
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$661,564
Expenses
$676,980
Assets
$588,319
Liabilities
$26,065

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matt McElligott (President)
  • Todd Nash (Past President)
  • Diana Wirth (President-Elect)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tammy Dennee (Executive Dir.): $110,833 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to promote environmentally & socially sound industry practices; a positive, contemporary image of the industry; improve & strengthen the economics of the industry, assure a strong political presence in all areas affecting the industry; and protect our industry communities & private property rights.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide professional services to study legislation, state and federal, with respect to matters concerning the effect on the beef industry. This information is used to represent, protect, and defend the beef industry from any matters that may have a detrimental effect to producers. Oca has provided reports and electronic updates on the status of matters concerning the effect on the beef industry to the Oregon beef council on a regular basis, allowing them to make decisions based on results. Success of the project is measured by the Oregon beef council's review of the information and their feedback and suggestions to augment future reports.

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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.