Texas Bridge Credit Union

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741158516
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Corpus Christi, TX, USA
Phone
3618554494
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,659,478
Expenses
$4,923,078
Assets
$92,389,891
Liabilities
$84,732,368

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID L BROOKS (CEO)
  • MARK AVELAR (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK AVELAR (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $145,427 total reported compensation
  • DAVID L BROOKS (CEO): $117,050 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 Texas bridge credit union is committed to being the primary financial institution of its field of membership including any qualified person that works, lives, or attends school in nueces county, is employed by the city of corpus christi, is a family member of a city employee or retiree from the city of corpus christi.

What it reported doing in 2025

Texas bridge credit union is a voluntary cooperative, not-for-profit financial institution. It was incorporated under the Texas credit union act in 1951 for the purpose of encouraging thrift among its members, creating a scource of credit at a fair and reasonable rate of interest, and providing an opportunity for its members to use and control their financial organization, in order to improve their economic well being. Texas bridge credit union is a community financial institution and has many stakeholders that depend on the manner the credit union is operating. Members, employees, directors, vendors, regulators, government entities, and our community, all have a stake in the success of our credit union.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.9%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.77; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.