Utah Power Credit Union
Legal name: Credit Unions Chartered in the State of Utah
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 870188878
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Phone
- 8017088900
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $45,442,052
- Expenses
- $37,127,614
- Assets
- $1,057,124,954
- Liabilities
- $3,492,953
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ryan Pollick (President/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Ryan Pollick (President/CEO): $300,140 total reported compensation
- Chris Brems (SVP Technology & Strategy): $216,766 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to ensure that Utah Power Credit Union creates financial power with our member–owners by providing excellent value and lifelong relationships.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Credit Union serves PacifiCorp employees, Union Pacific/Southern Pacific Railroad or Utah Railway company employees (living and/or working in Carbon or Emery County), class A members of IBEW Local Union 57 working in the construction unit, Deseret Power employees and its subsidiaries/cooperatives, the following related organizations: Intermountain Consumer Power Association, Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, Intermountain Power Agency, Utah Rural Electric Association, and their families. Money deposited from members is loaned out to other members. Funds not loaned out are invested. Income received from loan and investment interest allows us to provide low loan rates and high savings rates to our members. We return profits back to members in the form of dividends and any remaining profits go into a required reserve account.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 60
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 84
- Growth: 60
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 28.47; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $300K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 39 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.