Humboldt Watershed CWMA
Legal name: Humboldt Watershed Cooperative Weed Mgt Area
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200289010
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Spring Creek, NV, US
- Phone
- 7757622636
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $70,282
- Expenses
- $89,980
- Assets
- $26,280
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- GERALD MILLER (CHAIRMAN)
- GARY REESE (VICE CHAIRMAN)
- KRISTINE PRESTON (TREASURERSECRETARY)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide technical assistance, funding opportunities, and coordination to land managers, private landowners, conservation districts, and local weed control groups to prevent, contain, and eradicate invasive species that threaten agriculture, wildlife habitat, water quality, and public safety.
What it reported doing in 2024
The hwcwma is dedicated to the management and control of noxious and invasive weeds growing within the homboldt watershed. Hwcwma uses grant funding and assistance agreement funds to hire licensed herbicide contractors to treat noxious weeds. Project funds are also used to hold early weed extravaganzas and educate landowners about the detrimental effects noxious weeds have on nevadas critical ecosystems.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 92.6%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -28%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -33.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $83K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.