Chwmeg Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251758104
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4128263056
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,938,369
Expenses
$3,027,795
Assets
$2,633,529
Liabilities
$1,399,234

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRIS BRYANT (CHAIRPERSON)
  • DEANNA OLLERMAN (VICE-CHAIR)
  • LAUREN MORIARTY (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To improve general waste management practices by developing standard criteria, formats, and procedures for gathering key information to allow for the individual and independent evaluation of commercial waste transporters and/or management facilities and other commercial facilities and to broaden the knowledge of the corporation, its members, and the industry as a whole in environmentally safe management, transporation, recycliing, storage, treatement, and disposal of produced wastes and spent materials.

What it reported doing in 2025

Chwmeg, inc. Makes available to its members copies of reports resulting from comprehensive, independent reviews of commercial facilities that treat, dispose, recycle, or transport waste and spent materials. New and existing members are thus able to obtain reports on the commercial transporters, management facilities, and other businesses involved in the storage, handling, recycling, or disposal of wastes and spent materials. Members' consideration of these reviewed facilities is either to maintain/continue business relationships or to establish new business relationships with these service providers. Chwmeg's members save considerable resources by not having to bear the expense of performing a comprehensive review on their own.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.7%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 57.7%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.7% of revenue deployed · 57.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.