Elk River Education Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237125522
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Elk River, MN, USA
Phone
6122723488
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,066,619
Expenses
$957,671
Assets
$426,717
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

52 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lisa K Q Olson (President Negotiator)
  • Ronald Clifford Hustvedt Jr (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lisa K Q Olson (President Negotiator): $13,900 total reported compensation
  • Cory Puppe (Negotiator Teacher Rights): $7,434 total reported compensation
  • Sarah Klocker (Negotiator): $6,650 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 Elk River Education Association EREA is our teachers union for the Elk River Area School District. EREA provides representation for our members. We represent the teachers in contract negotiations. We work to provide a positive learning environment for the learners in our district.

What it reported doing in 2024

Stipends for the members who are fulfilling all the roles executive council members officers committee chairs committee meeting members etc. Representing our teaching staff and sharing union information representing our teachers negotiating the contract making sure the contract is followed by both the district and the teachers so that we may provide a quality education to our students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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: 79
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 50
  • 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: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.2%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 47 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $159K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $14K · 52 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 39 current checks pass · 11 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 102 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PaymentsToAffiliates column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.