Animas - La Plata Operation Maintenance and Replacement Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272243048
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Durango, CO, USA
Phone
9703857140
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,396,420
Expenses
$1,688,150
Assets
$10,372,733
Liabilities
$1,934,850

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Russell Howard (General Mgr): $201,005 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To protect, preserve, and operate all assets of the Animas-La Plata Project while capturing, storing, and releasing the Project water supply in the most efficient and cost effective manner for the members of the Association.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of the Association is to carry out the operation, maintenance, and replacement for the Animas-La Plata Project. The Animas-La Plata Project (ALP), located in southwestern Colorado and in northwestern New Mexico, was authorized by the Colorado River Basin Project Act of September 30, 1968 (Public Law 84-485). It provided for a multi-purpose project for municipal and industrial uses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.14; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 8 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.