Texas Association of County Election Officials

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331319946
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
7372794899
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$962,524
Expenses
$235,491
Assets
$727,033
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHANNON LACKEY (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIDGETTE ESCOBEDO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER MCGINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER MCGINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $77,495 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the Texas association of county election officials (taceo) is to provide educational resources and support to our members, fostering a strong and well-informed community of county election officials in Texas.

What it reported doing in 2024

Subcommittee meetings: the association organizes and convenes three subcommittees: legislative, education, data analytics. The legislative subcommittee is dedicated to monitoring, evaluating, and influencing legislative and regulatory activities relevant to the organization's mission and goals. This subcommittee is composed of knowledgeable members with expertise in public policy, advocacy, and election related topics. The education subcommittee is dedicated to the development and implementation of training programs that enhance the skills and competencies of its members. Additionally, this committee is focused on developing and enhancing educational initiatives that support the mission and goals of the association and the election communities. The data analytics subcommittee is responsible for overseeing the effective gathering and analysis of data crucial to the association s mission. This includes the development and refinement of data collection methods, use of analytics to derive actionable insights, and ensuring the integrity, privacy, and security of all data. The subcommittee aims to support data-driven decision making and enhance the organization s ability to measure and communicate its impact on local election communities. These activities do not have any initial costs associated with them. A data analyst in a nonprofit organization is responsible for providing valuable insights that inform strategic decisions, optimize programs, enhance engagement, and ultimately maximize the organization's impact by understanding trends, identifying areas for improvement, and demonstrating the effectiveness of their work to stakeholders through data-driven insights.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 75.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.09; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.