International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
376045265
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Oskaloosa, IA, USA
Phone
6417770326
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$189,145
Expenses
$187,156
Assets
$58,404
Liabilities
$14,610

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Russell Wines (Local President)
  • Jan Allen (Former Local President)

People named in this filing

  • Russell Wines (Local President)
  • Jasin Ptacnik (Local Chair)
  • Christopher Cassens (Local Financial Sec/Treasurer)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Our Mission is to unify the workforce in order to show solidarity and protect traditional union values. We are dedicated to the education of our members and the improvement of our union. We believe in bargaining collectively to insure that all people are treated fairly and equally by establishing wages benefits job security and working conditions equal to or higher than the industry standards. By doing so we will improve the standard of living for our families and our communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Membership support and representation

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.