CWA Local 1180

Legal name: Cwa Local 1180 Administrative Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800342121
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, US
Phone
212.226.6565
Rating
32
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Associations (Non-Government)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,630,366
Expenses
$32,329,441
Assets
$66,148,735
Liabilities
$11,813,723

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GLORIA MIDDLETON (Trustee): $252,979 total reported compensation
  • Teesha Foreman (Trustee): $205,390 total reported compensation
  • SEENARINE MOHABIR (IT manager): $190,508 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

CWA Local 1180 represents administrative and supervisory workers in New York City, providing collective bargaining, benefits, and advocacy to ensure fair wages, workplace protections, and retirement security for its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funded benefits of related benefit plans and paid all administrative expenses of those plans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% 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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 68
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 41
  • 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; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 40th 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: 0 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.