Ingleside on the Bay Coastal Watch Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843561197
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Ingleside, TX, USA
Phone
3613171361
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood, Block Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$859,260
Expenses
$530,937
Assets
$611,012
Liabilities
$-124

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patrick Nye (Co-President and Secretary)
  • Thomas Cerwonka (Co-President)
  • Kevin Schleicher (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Patrick Nye (Co-President and Secretary)
  • Craig Wadham (Director)
  • Thomas Cerwonka (Co-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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the health, safety, and quality of life for the residents of Ingleside and surrounding communities through research, education, communication, and action.

What it reported doing in 2025

BP2 Stop Enbridge: Program accomplishments included continued advocacy and organizing efforts opposing large-scale ammonia and related industrial buildout in Ingleside Texas through community engagement public education regulatory participation and environmental health advocacy. Funding supported approximately 30% of staff payroll taxes and benefits helping sustain critical organizational capacity for outreach permit engagement and frontline community support. Program activities also included advancement of a regional health study project focused on environmental and public health concerns within the Coastal Bend.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.3%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • 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: 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: 38.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 36.5% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 30.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 61st 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: 54.3% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $463K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.