Texas Press Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741084462
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Austin, TX, US
Phone
512-477-6755
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$838,961
Expenses
$737,799
Assets
$5,088,206
Liabilities
$334,075

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BILL PATTERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA CHAPPEL (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • YVONNE MINTZ (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHEAL HODGES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DONNIS BAGGETT (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHEAL HODGES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $222,285 total reported compensation
  • DONNIS BAGGETT (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $135,565 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE HEARNE (CONTROLLER): $117,706 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The association promotes the welfare of Texas newspapers, encourages higher standards of journalism, and plays an important role in protecting the public’s right to know as an advocate of First Amendment liberties.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual convention, regional conventions, the better newspaper contest and other meeting of members to provide educational seminars to members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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: 89
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 40

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: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.9; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 29 current checks pass · 16 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesInvstMgmntFees column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLobbying column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.