Central Washington Home Builders Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910723310
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Yakima, WA, USA
Phone
5094544006
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,077,308
Expenses
$943,687
Assets
$1,552,433
Liabilities
$301,126

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bobby Graham (President)
  • Aaron Wilson (Vice President)
  • Kelly Sowder (President Elect)
  • Tim Lovelass (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • M Lindsay Brown (Executive Off.): $111,298 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 Central Washington Home Builders Association (CWHBA) is a Not-For-Profit professional trade association dedicated to promoting, protecting and preserving the homebuilding industry. CWHBA has been building and supporting our communities since 1955. Covering the geographical areas of Klickitat, Kittitas, Yakima, Chelan, Douglas, and Okanogoan Counties, the Association is comprised of 530 member businesses employing nearly 10,000 people. The CWHBA is based in Yakima with a chapter in Chelan County. The CWHBA is led by member volunteers and professional staff, who strive to address issues unique to the various professionals within the association.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tour of Homes: The tour of homes is a showcase event for the association, highlighting new construction houses to the general public. The event helps to promote the home building industry and market the association as a resource for the general public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.