International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 271

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480276460
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Wichita, KS, USA
Phone
3162678255
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,902,075
Expenses
$1,716,742
Assets
$4,210,919
Liabilities
$62,950

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JORDAN NOLAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEIMESON SAUDINO (BUSINESS MAN): $163,279 total reported compensation
  • DAVID BISHOP (ORGANIZER): $143,432 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD POWELL (ASST BUSINES): $134,809 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lu 271 provides a variety of benefits to electrical workers located in and around the wichita area, including pensions, continuing ed, death benefits, contract negotiations, and industry promotion.

What it reported doing in 2025

The local union no. 271 was organized in 1914 to provide a variety of benefits to electrical workers located in and around the wichita area. Included in the benefits provided to members through the collection of dues are pension funds, general assistance conventions, continuing education, death benefits, journals, local administration, contract negotiations, and promotion of the industry in the wichita area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.7% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 19 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.