Texas Court Reporters Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742269043
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Athens, TX, USA
Phone
9036751806
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$579,555
Expenses
$466,050
Assets
$1,163,687
Liabilities
$15,241

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAULA FREDERICK (PRESIDENT/IP)

Highest reported compensation

  • BROOKE INGRAM (EXECUTIVE DI): $80,106 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Texas court reporters association is to advance the profession of stenographic court reporting through education, advocacy, and service to its members.

What it reported doing in 2025

Texas court reporters association seeks to advance the profession of stenographic court reporting through education, advocacy and service to its members. The organization provides education through online continuing education, seminars, a credentialing program and an annual convention for its members. The organization also seeks to monitor and influence regulation detrimental to court reporters. In 2025, 473 court reporters attended the annual conference and the association served 1,084 members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 78
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 64
  • 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.6%; rating input score 87; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -30.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th 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 · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 16 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency 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 — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.