Crisis Pregnancy Center of Baytown

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760400314
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Highlands, TX, USA
Phone
2814272273
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$449,695
Expenses
$362,233
Assets
$1,038,041
Liabilities
$603,636

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dennis Cowles (President)
  • David Truncale (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jacob LeBlanc (Member)
  • Nancy Lange (Member)
  • Denise Hyde (Member)

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

Our mission is to uphold life by demonstrating the love of Christ to women, men and teens facing crisis pregnancies. Spiritual, physical, and emotional support is provided in addition to post abortion counseling. We encourage our community to recognize the sanctity of all human life and adopt a Godly view of sexuality through abstinence education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Pregnancy Testing and Counseling is the core program of our ministry. Clients come to us in a pregnancy crisis and receive peer counsel as well as free pregnancy testing with a verification of pregnancy so that they can begin the process of applying for Medicaid and WIC. Additionally those who are eligible according to our Medical Director are given a free ultrasound to get accurate gestational age (find out exactly how far along she is), verify viability of pregnancy (ectopic? no heartbeat? molar pregnancy?), to confirm if multiple gestation (twin? or triplet?).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.87; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.5% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44% of revenue deployed · 54.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $196K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.