Amalgamated Transit Union-local 265
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941014118
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Campbell, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4088740900
- Rating
- 25
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,155,913
- Expenses
- $2,094,471
- Assets
- $1,905,965
- Liabilities
- $195,868
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RAJVINDER SINGH (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RAJVINDER SINGH (PRESIDENT): $170,834 total reported compensation
- ELISEO ACOSTA (DEVEL. COORD): $164,869 total reported compensation
- JOHN POSPISHEK (REC & FINANC): $157,657 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 local's primary function includes representing members in matters related to employee-employer relations, including, but not limited to wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment and to protect and preserve the union as an institution in the performance of its legal and contractual obligations.
What it reported doing in 2024
To promote and foster goodwill and public support for the welfare and interest of this union and its members by actions including, but not limited to: organizing the unorganized, sponsoring activities that conserve the interests of this union and serve its membership, and providing donations to support labor friendly organizations and other organizations in our local community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 14
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -36.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $109K reported
- Consistency: 14 of 16 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.