Texas Section Society for Range Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
746083109
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Angelo, TX, USA
Phone
3256561851
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$146,172
Expenses
$120,783
Assets
$1,085,842
Liabilities
$1,312

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HUMBERTO PEROTTO (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES JACKSON (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW COFFMAN (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DOUG TOLLESON (PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • HUMBERTO PEROTTO (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES JACKSON (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW COFFMAN (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide leadership for the stewardship of rangelands based on sound ecological principals. To foster advancement in the science and art of grazing land management, to promote progress in the conservation and greatest sustained use of forage and soil resources, to stimulate discussion and understanding of scientific and practical range and pasture problems, to provide a medium for the exchange of ideas and facts among section members and with allied technologists, and to encourage professional improvement of its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other program services included scholarships and an internship in natural resource areas. Professional programs for college students stressing professional development and education. Speaking contest, plant contest and other educational activities for students including travel assistance. Also, programs for young professionals.

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 90% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 17.4%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.99; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $108K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.