San Miguel Electric Cooperative Incorporated
Legal name: San Miguel Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 741937134
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Christine, Texas, US
- Phone
- 8307843411
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $187,427,524
- Expenses
- $187,427,524
- Assets
- $496,945,022
- Liabilities
- $373,896,918
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Craig Courter Jan to Apr 2025 (CEO/General Manager)
- Jason Cowan started Oct 2025 (CEO/General Manager)
- David Rosse (Vice President)
- Blaine Warzecha (President)
Highest reported compensation
- David Burris (Fuels Manager): $318,526 total reported compensation
- Derek Burns (Plant Manager): $315,052 total reported compensation
- Vanessa Pawelek (Chief Financial Officer): $286,087 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide safe, reliable and affordable power to our members through diligent resource management, environmental stewardship, and employee growth, while helping to meet needs within the communities we serve. Maintain a dependable power supply at the lowest possible and competitive cost to our customers through integrity, hard work, and safety.
What it reported doing in 2025
San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc. was created for the sole purpose of owning and operating a 400 Megawatt mine-mouth lignite-fired generating plant and associated mining facility to furnish power and energy to its members on a cooperative basis.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.65; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $319K · 32 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $78.3M reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.