Work Services Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752247311
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Wichita Falls, TX, USA
- Phone
- 9407663207
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Sheltered Employment
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $51,129,315
- Expenses
- $48,024,073
- Assets
- $78,573,910
- Liabilities
- $4,291,508
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID TOOGOOD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID TOOGOOD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $228,515 total reported compensation
- BEN EZZELL (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $183,274 total reported compensation
- ROBERT A PROPP (VP OF HUMAN RESOURCES): $136,999 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 organization's mission is to empower people with disabilities to achieve personal growth and independence, and to improve their quality of life through training and employment. Primary activities include vocational assessments, vocational training, job search services, job placement, and employment. The organization participates in the federal abilityone program and the Texas works wonders program which provide direct award contracts for products and services to eligible non-profit agencies. In 2025, the organization employed 619 people with significant disabilities.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization's mission is to empower people with disabilities to achieve personal growth and independence, and to improve their quality of life through training and employment. Primary activities include vocational assessments, vocational training, job search services, job placement, and employment. The organization participates in the federal abilityone program and the Texas works wonders program which provide direct award contracts for products and services to eligible nonprofit agencies. In 2025, the organization employed 619 people with significant disabilities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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
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: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 89.1%; rating input score 89; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $43.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $229K · 18 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
- 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 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.