Ranch Hands Rescue

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264610450
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Justin, TX, USA
Phone
9402400500
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,755,696
Expenses
$2,038,729
Assets
$8,080,953
Liabilities
$45,000

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert F Williams (President & Chairman)
  • Landon Dickeson (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Robert F Williams (President & Chairman): $159,717 total reported compensation
  • Landon Dickeson (Executive Director): $117,583 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 a sanctuary for people and animals, founded on hope and healing for the long-term recovery of trauma victims, special needs animals, and male survivors of sex trafficking.

What it reported doing in 2025

Counseling center - ranch hands rescue specializes in treating more complex trauma cases, such as victims of severe and repetitive abuse and people not making progress in their current treatment programs. The organization heals critical care animals, then gives them a purpose in rhr's counseling program as they participate in eaac alongside specifically selected licensed professionals.see schedule o for details on the threapeutic programs provided and their successes for the year.

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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.96; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.