Bac Mtn West Admin District Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810949043
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, USA
- Phone
- 7028730332
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,273,428
- Expenses
- $3,098,133
- Assets
- $4,887,791
- Liabilities
- $17,034
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- RICHARD CRAWFORD (DIRECTOR): $239,497 total reported compensation
- ANTHONY IVESTER (SECRETARY/TR): $215,857 total reported compensation
- JACOB GONZALEZ (EXECUTIVE CO): $189,541 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide for, protect, and improve the general welfare of its members and the employees represented by it, both directly and indirectly by all lawful means and methods. To organize all persons engaged in work within its jurisdiction; to promote or establish programs to meet costs of health care, retirement, unemployment and similar needs; to promote health, welfare and safety; to promote rights to collective bargaining , harmonious relations between employers, employees and community organizations; to take such other actions as may tend to protect and promote the welfare and interest of this district council and its members.
What it reported doing in 2025
To organize and train all workers. To secure improved wages, hours, working conditions, and other economic advantages through organization negotiations and collective bargaining for members in the states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.
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 93% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 56
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.4%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $239K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 12 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.