Texas Capital Bridge Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
746075084
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5126273415
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,493
Expenses
$51,974
Assets
$167,767
Liabilities
$132

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Craig (President and Director)
  • Raymond Borrega (Vice President and Director)

People named in this filing

  • Mark Craig (President and Director)
  • Raymond Borrega (Vice President and Director)
  • James Southerland (Treasurer and 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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide bridge games, lessons, education, and tournaments in order to promote and sustain the game of bridge.

What it reported doing in 2025

Regional and sectional tournaments (beginner and open level); approximately 300 participants this year. Special games to raise money for charities, free member appreciation games, and qualifying games for regional tournaments; approximately 350 participants this year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.4%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 44.5%; rating input score 45

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -70.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.23; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.4% of revenue deployed · 44.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.