Wimberley Valley Watershed Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742879756
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Wimberley, TX, USA
Phone
5127223390
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,350,276
Expenses
$1,329,356
Assets
$16,755,712
Liabilities
$10,541,155

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Parc Smith (President)
  • David Baker (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Baker (Executive Director): $320,118 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 Watershed Associations (WVWA) mission is to ensure that communities are aware of their connection and responsibilities to their watershed and are supported in implementing water policies and practices that will ensure ecological sustainability for future generations. We advocate for clean, clear flowing springs and streams and the sustained health of the Central Texas region through conducting scientific research, networking and facilitating diverse stakeholders, and providing community engagement through experiential education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Policy Advocacy and Environmental PlanningThe organization works with nonprofits, governments, and resource management agencies to promote sustainable environmental policies to protect and preserve land and water. We hold a broad lens of the dynamics affecting water in Central Texas and engage stakeholders in community and regional planning processes that promote best management practices for new development and incentives for protecting open space for aquifer recharge and water quality. The WA provides crucial support for partnering organizations and districts to address large policy cases that pose significant threats to our water resources. By leveraging its extensive network and providing sound scientific expertise, the Watershed Association enables a coordinated and effective response to complex water issues. This collaborative approach allows us to address water challenges at both local and regional levels, comprehensively ensuring a strong, unified stance in the face of emerging threats to our water resources. In 20242025, our advocacy focused on defending the authority of Groundwater Conservation Districts (GCDs) in the face of ongoing legal challenges. Regionally, we helped establish and implement the Blanco-Cypress Watershed Protection Plana first-of-its-kind interlocal agreement uniting Hays County, Wimberley, Woodcreek, and Texas State University to coordinate monitoring and policy efforts. This collaborative governance framework is now funding long-term watershed protection and clean water initiatives across jurisdictions. Through local, regional, and state-level initiativesincluding drought-stage policy development, pristine streams advocacy, and land-use planning reformswe advance proactive and innovative strategies to ensure water resilience and ecological integrity in a rapidly shifting landscape.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.1%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $75.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.3%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.6; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.1% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $320K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.