Association of Water Agencies of Ventura County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770232669
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ventura, CA, USA
Phone
8056440922
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$344,708
Expenses
$356,622
Assets
$101,480
Liabilities
$1,699

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susanne Cooper (President)
  • Greg Patterson (President Elect)
  • Steve Huber (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kelle Pistone (Managing Director): $184,956 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Create a forum for communication to exchange ideas and work toward uniform standards and policies among water entities; Improve communication for mutual benefit of disaster response and emergency preparedness; Promote water education and discussions for development, protection, conservation and improvement of water resources.

What it reported doing in 2025

PUBLIC OFFICIALS/MEMBER RECEPTION - Held annually at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Learning and Banquet Center. Purpose: AWA members and guests assemble and communicate with region's local, state and federal officials and policymakers. Keynote dignitary speaker; current/crucial water briefing. Annual water leadership award presentation recognizing an individual or group for "outstanding service and dedication, in making a significant effort to improve our water resources.".

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 62% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 71.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $357K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 6 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $185K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.