Texas Association of Resource Conservation & Development Areas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742714211
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Victoria, TX, USA
Phone
3612129977
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,587
Expenses
$74,247
Assets
$495,404
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NEIL FRITSCH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PAULA BURGESS (ZONE VICE PR)
  • PAM CORDER (2ND VICE PRE)
  • LORI DODD (ZONE VICE PR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

As a nonprofit organization, its focus is on assisting rural communities in Texas. The organization works through a network of 13 individual resource conservation and development councils across Texas to implement environmental and community development projects in small towns and rural areas. Leadership training, grant research, and dirct financial assistance is provided through various local, state and federal partnerships to improve quality of life for rural citizens and the environment everyone depends on.

What it reported doing in 2024

In connection with the Texas commission on environental quality have completed multiple sep (special environmental projects) in the current year. These projects consisted of household hazardous waste cleanups, abandoned tire cleanups, illegal trash dump cleanup, replacement of failing septic systems for low income households, collected and disposed of scrap tires for rural communities, collected and disposed o electronic waste for rural communities, and assisted small school districts with the purchase of new low emission schools buses to replace older buses that did not meet epa emission standards.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -409%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.67; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.