Alabama's Water Environment Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630781189
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Northport, AL, USA
Phone
2055217525
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$138,318
Expenses
$185,179
Assets
$743,745
Liabilities
$378,720

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE KING (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JEREMY CEEL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SPENCER TUELL (PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN MCCRISPIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN MCCRISPIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $61,472 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Advancing knowledge of Alabama's water environment. Awea is commited to serve Alabama's water professionals by providing leadership, education, and cultivation of ideas that support and protect Alabama's clean water environment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Workshops and meetings for water treatment system operators; to advance knowledge of how to benefit the public through protection and ideas of enhancing Alabama's water environment; budgeted meetings to exchange ideas and experiences; quarterly published literature distributed to members and those connected to the organization; engineering technical seminars for engineers; utility management conferences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 63% 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 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.3%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 21.8%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -33.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.02; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.3% of revenue deployed · 21.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $40K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.