Texas Coastal Cattlewomen
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 832460367
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 7138160311
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $78,852
- Expenses
- $57,940
- Assets
- $91,238
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sarijane Stanton (President/VP of Beef Promotion)
People named in this filing
- Sarijane Stanton (President/VP of Beef Promotion)
- Jessica Chase (VP Education)
- Shelly Brock (VP Membership)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Supporting the beef industry and awarding college scholarships to students majoring in agriculture related fields.
What it reported doing in 2024
TCCW is a 501(c)(3) organization covering 12 Gulf Coast counties supporting the beef industry and awarding college scholarships to students majoring in agriculture related fields. We have monthly meetings and often have speakers in beef related fields. Once a year we have a fundraiser luncheon with a style show which is where we raise most of our donation funds. We also make beef donations to various charities such as Brookwood and Camp Hope.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.3%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.3% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $51K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.