Wimberley Valley Arts and Cultural Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465725493
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Wimberley, TX, USA
Phone
7135608103
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$235,320
Expenses
$183,059
Assets
$162,706
Liabilities
$1,856

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Romano (Vice President)
  • Deirdre Taylor (President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Romano (Vice President)
  • Rose Gabriel (Director)
  • Ann Hollingsworth (Treasurer)

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

As steward of the Wimberley Valley Cultural District WimberleyArts promotes a vibrant cultural arts community-embracing visual performing literary and culinary arts-that engages residents and supports cultural tourism through creative programming alliances appreciation and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

A monthly Art Crawl in 2025 features local galleries and venues staying open late offering special activities and refreshments to engage locals and attract out-of-town visitors. Bootiful Wimberley showcases 57 6-foot-high boot sculptures painted by local artists and sponsored by businesses 3 new in 2025 becoming a cultural highlight that draws visitors who enjoy searching for them around town. Sponsored by local organizations or City government Public art displays include murals painted by local artists enhancing Wimberleys visual appeal as a tourism destination and a visually appealing place to call home.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 22.2%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $162K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.