Tennessee Weed Science Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 263299598
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Knoxville, TN, USA
- Phone
- 8659748805
- Rating
- 93
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,950
- Expenses
- $84,010
- Assets
- $36,738
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TOM MUELLER (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- TOM MUELLER (PRESIDENT)
- LARRY STECKEL (SECRETARY)
- BOB HAYES (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The primary purpose of the organization is to promote and advance weed science issues (control of unwanted plant pests) in the state of Tennessee.
What it reported doing in 2025
A major initiative of the tnwss is an educational short course held periodically, which brings in nationally known speakers to lecture on weed science topics, including herbicide mode of action and weed resistance to those herbicides. The second course was held in 2017 and approximately 26 individuals attended the course. The third event was held in 2019 with approximately 27 individuals in attendance. The 2021 event was postponed due to the covid pandemic.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $84K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.