Trao Retired Horse Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
901113285
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4054278753
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,897
Expenses
$37,047
Assets
$21,673
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MIKE BIEHLER (DIRECTOR)
  • RANDY BLAIR (DIRECTOR)
  • DANNY CALDWELL (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

The purpose of this trust is the promotion of the responsible and humane retirement of thoroughbred racehorses including, but not limited to, education of the thoroughbred racing industry and general public, encouragement of best practices by owners and trainers with regard to the retention, retraining, and retirement of thoroughbred racehorses, prevention of cruelty to retired thoroughbred racehorses, and support for the transition, training, and placement of retired thoroughbred racehorses.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the year, the organization promoted the responsible and humane retirement of thoroughbred racehorses including the education of the thoroughbred racing industry and general public and: 1) encouraged best practices by owners and trainers with regard to the retention, retraining, and retirement of thoroughbred racehorses, 2) encouraged best practices by owners and trainers with regard to the prevention of cruelty to retired thoroughbred racehorses, and 3) supported the transition, training, and placement of retired thoroughbred racehorses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 91% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 21; 21st 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: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.