Texas Urological Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742420918
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
- Location
- Schaumburg, IL, US
- Phone
- (847) 517-7225
- Rating
- 47
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $326,118
- Expenses
- $276,721
- Assets
- $1,330,768
- Liabilities
- $12,788
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher H Cantrill MD (President)
- Kanwaljit Mahal MD (PAST PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- Christopher H Cantrill MD (President)
- Ricardo R Gonzalez MD (Treasurer)
- Kanwaljit Mahal MD (PAST 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 ethically promote the practice of urology in the best interest of the public and the medical profession, to continually improve the professional standards of urology, to further the continued education of its members, to study and evaluate all economic aspects of this specialty, to promote cooperation between all disciplines interested in urology, and to advise all other professional groups concerning urology.
What it reported doing in 2024
The society holds an annual meeting of members to promote the practice of urology, improve the professional standards and further continuing education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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
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: 90
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 60
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; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.81; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.