Texas Master Gardener Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331541525
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Laredo, TX, USA
Phone
9565235290
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$819
Expenses
$275
Assets
$544
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ana Gutierrez (President)

People named in this filing

  • Ana Gutierrez (President)
  • Federico Elizondo (Treasurer)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Education, literacy, and charity

What it reported doing in 2025

Education: - sponsored Lawn and Garden Expo to educate the community on different horticultural topics for approximately 50 attendees; - attended monthly farmer's market to set up booth and promote seasonal horticultural topics with approximately 30 attendees; - attended community events by conducting presentations and trainings for over 100 attendees across 5 events. Literacy: - answered approximately 50 community member's questions regarding horticulture online, over the phone, and in person; - created digital, seasonal newsletters to encourage readership among members and general public with a readership of over 100 subscribers; - promoted print and digital material on common horticultural topics to over 200 attendees at events or virtually. Charity: - hosted plant sale to raise approximately $400 funds for upcoming community and educational events; - collected $300 county dues from members to support ongoing educational and programmatic activities; - paid 7 member state dues to support Texas Master Gardener parent organization for educational and programmatic activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 63% 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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 66.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th 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: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.