Texas Association of Sports Officials

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
751653696
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richardson, TX, USA
Phone
2143902895
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,975,922
Expenses
$1,741,909
Assets
$2,353,019
Liabilities
$274,494

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL FITCH (ED/PRES/TREA): $146,063 total reported compensation
  • BILL THEODORE (ASST. EXECUT): $82,246 total reported compensation
  • MONA SCHULTZ (CONTROLLER): $52,145 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To be the main advocate for sports officials promoting fair pay, quality working conditions and recognition of the value of our services while providing highly qualified and trained officials who are dedicated to interscholastic competition, participants, coaches and to the game itself for Texas junior, middle and high school athletic contests.

What it reported doing in 2024

Texas association of sports officials seeks to provide leadership, training, educational materials, insurance, and support to members in order to provide excellent sports officiating in Texas' public and private schools. The organization has 160 chapters serving over 17,000 members throughout the state of Texas. The organization creates and distributes training materials to its members to assist them in continually improviing their officiating skills and knowledge of the rules. The organization conducts state-wide meetings and regional clinics to to assist with this training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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: 93
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.8%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $146K · 17 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $157K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.