Texas Association of Big Brothers Big Sisters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261356822
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
5124725437
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,231
Expenses
$4,239
Assets
$13,948

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • BOBBI JO DAVIS (Chairman)
  • BRENT FIELDS (Director)
  • EMILY NANCE (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

Texas association of big brothers big sisters (tx. Assoc. Of bbbs) serves as the entity that receives funds to be distributed to the big brothers big sisters Texas state association entities. Tx assoc. Of bbbs acts on behalf of its members with respect to raising public awareness of the mission and program of the members, fundraising, permitted lobbying activities related to the corporation's exempt purpose, and other matters. Also, to perform such other functions as may be necessary or appropriate to fulfill the purpose of the corporation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Successfully raised awareness at a state level on behalf of the big brothers big sisters entities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.29; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.8% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 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.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.