San Bernard Electric Cooperative
Legal name: San Bernard Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 740880083
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Bellville, TX, United States
- Phone
- (979) 865-3171
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $113,010,606
- Expenses
- $112,918,985
- Assets
- $293,502,719
- Liabilities
- $167,235,813
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SAMMY CONDRA (PRESIDENT)
- NORMAN KIECKE (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL ABLES (CEO/GENERAL MANAGER)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL ABLES (CEO/GENERAL MANAGER): $489,286 total reported compensation
- JAMES JOUETT (ELECTRIC SYSTEMS MANAGER): $320,640 total reported compensation
- JARED JANICEK (CFO): $264,521 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission To safely provide our members with electric service at the lowest possible cost, consistent with sound business practices. Follow Us Online. If our staking technicians are scheduled to meet with you it is essential that you keep this appointment, as we cannot proceed with your request for electrical service until the stakes are in place and you have provided us with the following information. (If you cannot keep this appointment, please give us 24 hours notice so we can best utilize the Staking Technicians busy schedule.) Type of electrical load to be served (residence, mobile home, well, shop, etc.). Size of electrical load to be served. You will need to provide an electrical load analysis or be able to provide the total AMP capacity required. IF YOUR ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS EXCEED 200 AMPS, WE REQUIRE AN ELECTRICAL LOAD ANALYSI.
What it reported doing in 2025
Providing electric energy to our members - 33,684 active services at year end were provided electricity on a cooperative basis through the allocation of patronage capital.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 38.8%; rating input score 39; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.6; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $489K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10M reported
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 39/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.