Boulder Dam Credit Union

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880059939
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Boulder City, NV, USA
Phone
(702) 293-7777
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,822,882
Expenses
$28,934,079
Assets
$829,187,256
Liabilities
$730,626,722

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEELE HENDRIX (PRESIDENT / CEO)
  • JARON SINGLETON (VICE-PRESIDENT / CFO)
  • KYLE JOHNSON (VICE-PRESIDENT / RISK MANAGEMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEELE HENDRIX (PRESIDENT / CEO): $456,699 total reported compensation
  • KYLE JOHNSON (VICE-PRESIDENT / RISK MANAGEMENT): $225,236 total reported compensation
  • MARY BETH CLIFT (MEMBER SERVICES COORDINATOR): $219,151 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We Are People Helping People Build Their Futures & Realize Their Dreams

What it reported doing in 2024

The second main service that boulder dam credit union (the credit union) offers is deposit services to eligible members. The credit union offers savings accounts, checking accounts, and individual retirement accounts to all members. In order to maintain a share account an individual must be eligible for membership. Eligibility requires that a person live or work in boulder city, Nevada. Due to the exceptional service level provided by the credit union, approximately 90% of eligible members are members of the credit union. Once again, the credit union does not charge fees for deposit accounts; other than punitive fees for overdrafts and insufficient fund items. At 12/31/2024, the credit union had 20,103 members totaling $729,259,899 in share deposits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.5%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 28.66; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $457K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 19 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Conflict-of-interest policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.