Rio Grande Valley Linking Economic and Academic Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742691363
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Weslaco, TX, USA
Phone
9564053091
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,890
Expenses
$250,137
Assets
$74,451
Liabilities
$-4,100

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELOY GARZA (PRESIDENT)
  • ESMERALDA ADAME MBA EDD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MARCOS SILVA (RGV LEAD EXEC DIRECTOR): $45,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Rgv lead's primary exempt purpose is to develop a skilled workforce in the rio grande valley.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Texas regional pathways network (trpn) was launched in 2019 to support governor abbott's tri-agency workforce initiative, through which the Texas education agency, Texas higher education coordinating board, and Texas workforce commission are working collaboratively to increase economic prosperity in Texas by linking education and industry. With a vision that all texans are prepared to contribute to an inclusive and competitive Texas economy, the trpn aims to build regional talent pipelines that spur economic growth across the state and ensure that all texans have the skills and credentials needed for economic advancement. The trpn is a growing community of regions across the state working to develop, refine, and scale high-quality career and education pathways. Through the network, grantees can share knowledge and best practices, make strategic connections and build intentional partnerships across regions in service of their goals. Rgv lead serves as the intermediary for 3 cohorts serving: la feria, rio hondo, santa rosa, san isidro, lasara, san perlita, vanguard academy, donna and raymondville. We bring together school leaderships, educators, workforce boards, higher education institutions, and employers to bring real change to the school and local area. Some areas of study include welding, wind energy, communications, and health care--these areas of study fall in the high-demand occupation of the south Texas region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $233K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 25 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.