Baltimore-Washington Laborers' Joint Training Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237055641
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4105251500
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,378,314
Expenses
$1,929,823
Assets
$12,810,594
Liabilities
$160,010

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON MCDONALD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON MCDONALD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $194,088 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 goal of baltimore-Washington laborers' joint training fund is to make sure every union laborer has the skills needed to maintain sound employment, work safely, and give our employers a competitive edge over nonunion employers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Baltimore-Washington laborers' joint training is a nonprofit training fund that provides training to construction craft laborers so that they can gain new skills or upgrade their current skills. Laborers new to the trade can acquire the necessary skills to enter the construction industry with confidence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 63% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.8%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.9%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.64; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.8% of revenue deployed · 34.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $666K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 19/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.