Trinity Edwards Springs Protection Assoc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473645996
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Wimberley, TX, USA
Phone
5128472683
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$703,802
Expenses
$711,870
Assets
$127,648
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Way (Vice President)
  • Andrew Weber (President)

People named in this filing

  • James Blackburn (Director)
  • Patrick Cox (Director)
  • Bob Elkins (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of The Trinity Edwards Springs Protection Association, dba Trinity Edwards Science and Policy Alliance (TESPA) is to protect the Trinity and Edwards aquifers, the springs that flow from this interconnected system, and protect these waters for the people and wildlife who use and depend on them.

What it reported doing in 2025

During 2025, TESPA continued its work to protect groundwater resources and spring systems in the Texas Hill Country, with a primary focus on regulatory enforcement, aquifer protection, and public education. TESPAs principal activity during the year involved filing a complaint at the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) related to Aqua Texas admitted over-pumping within the Trinity Aquifer system serving the Wimberley Valley region. Building on actions initiated in 2024, TESPA pursued regulatory remedies seeking enforcement of groundwater permit limitations and conservation requirements. TESPA developed an evidentiary record demonstrating systemic over-pumping and significant water loss associated with aging infrastructure and excessive line leakage. TESPA requested that the PUC require corrective actions, including infrastructure repairs and limitations on new customer connections until compliance with applicable groundwater regulations is achieved. The matter was fully briefed during 2025 and remains pending before the State Office of Administrative Hearings and the Public Utility Commission. In addition, TESPA conducted public education and outreach activities related to groundwater conservation, aquifer science, and sustainable water management. TESPA also expanded collaborative efforts with peer organizations, research institutions, and conservation groups focused on groundwater science, watershed protection, environmental policy, and aquifer sustainability in order to advance long-term groundwater protection strategies throughout Central Texas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 98%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $857.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -1.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 98% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $697K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $499K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.