Texas Water Mission Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271688916
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2108592195
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$116,927
Expenses
$106,219
Assets
$96,065
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Maddox (President)
  • Linda Stone (Executive Director)
  • Brandy Flores (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Linda Stone (Executive Director): $30,000 total reported compensation
  • Brandy Flores (Executive Director): $28,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Texas Water Mission supports communities in need by providing safe drinking water and hygiene solutions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Honduras: In 2024 we focused on upgrading our Pump Repair capabilities by purchasing a new generator and a new compressor for our workshop and for using at well sites. We completed a covered storage facility for our pump repair tools and equipmennt and for spare pump parts. We completed repairs on the pump at Quebrada Grande and did maintenance and repair work on the well at Santa Maria Jamastran. Finally, we made necessary repairs on our old pump repair truck to keep it in working order for another year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% 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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $167.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 9.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58% of revenue deployed · 63.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.