Texas Rice Producers Legislative Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760435843
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Nada, TX, USA
Phone
9795434950
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,595
Expenses
$23,486
Assets
$51,285
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • COLEMAN FRANZ (DIRECTOR)
  • TIMOTHY GERTSON (DIRECTOR)
  • CRAIG GUTHMAN (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To create and sponsor an organization to promote and work on issues that effect the Texas rice industry to better the conditions of those engaged in rice farming.

What it reported doing in 2025

Promoting interest of rice farming through state and national associations and political representation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.9%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.18; rating input score 39; 39th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36% of revenue deployed · 30.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 20 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.