International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 949

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410328942
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Burnsville, MN, USA
Phone
9528908484
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,616,181
Expenses
$2,587,231
Assets
$5,689,931
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON SITZMANN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LUKE LALLEMONT (BUSINESS REP): $225,283 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL O'CONNOR (BUSINESS REP): $194,743 total reported compensation
  • TODD INGALLS (BUSINESS REP): $189,457 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Labor union

What it reported doing in 2025

Ibew local union no. 949 primarily represents workers employed in the utility, telephone and manufacturing industries in Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota and South Dakota in the jurisdiction set forth in the local's bylaws. The stated purpose of the local is to promote by all proper means the material and intellectual welfare of its members. To that end, the officers and business agents of the local collectively bargain with employers on behalf of the local's membership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 70
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 44
  • 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80%; rating input score 80; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.2; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% 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: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $225K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.