Texas Public Policy Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742524057
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Austin, Texas, US
- Phone
- 512-472-2700
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $26,056,617
- Expenses
- $25,198,419
- Assets
- $28,528,014
- Liabilities
- $571,402
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GREGORY SINDELAR (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MARK MILLS (DISTINGUISHED SR FELLOW): $570,498 total reported compensation
- JB HORTON (EXEC VP - DEVELOPMENT): $440,245 total reported compensation
- GREGORY SINDELAR (CEO): $396,621 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 Texas Public Policy Foundation is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research institute dedicated to advancing free-market principles, limited government, and individual liberty.
What it reported doing in 2025
In furtherance of the Texas public policy foundation's mission, the center for the american future exists to advance tenth amendment principles through opposition to government abuse and overreach in subject matter areas of environmental, private property, and business autonomy rights. The center enhances the foundation's core mission by launching challenges to overreach at the administrative, district, and appellate court levels. The center represents clients whose lives and liberty are threatened by government action in defiance of the constitution.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.9%; rating input score 73
- Program expense ratio: 74.9%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 72.9% of revenue deployed · 74.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $570K · 30 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.