International Union of Elevator Constructors Local No 2
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 361265720
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Chicago Ridge, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7089077770
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,003,700
- Expenses
- $4,411,865
- Assets
- $12,826,033
- Liabilities
- $11,156
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JUAN GONZALEZ JR (BUSINESS MGR/PRESIDENT)
- GARY PIPIRAS (BUSINESS MGR/PRESIDENT & BUSINESS REP/VP)
Highest reported compensation
- GARY PIPIRAS (BUSINESS MGR/PRESIDENT & BUSINESS REP/VP): $295,432 total reported compensation
- ERIC CRANE (BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVE/VP): $278,303 total reported compensation
- ROBERT KENNEDY (BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVE/VP): $278,267 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 exempt purpose of local no. 2 is to encourage a higher standard of skill among its members; to cultivate a feeling of friendship among the craft; to obtain and maintain a fair standard of wages; to assist each other in securing employment; to protect the jurisdiction of the craft; to engage in cultural, civic, legislative, fraternal, educational, charitable, welfare, and social and other activities which further the interests, directly and indirectly, of this organization and its membership; and to use legal and appropriate means for the accomplishment of the foregoing objectives.
What it reported doing in 2024
The exempt purpose of local no. 2 is to encourage a higher standard of skill among its members; to cultivate a feeling of friendship among the craft; to obtain and maintain a fair standard of wages; to assist each other in securing employment; to protect the jurisdiction of the craft; to engage in cultural, civic, legislative, fraternal, educational, charitable, welfare, social and other activities which further the interests, directly or indirectly, of this organization and its members; and to use legal and appropriate means for the accomplishment of the foregoing objectives. This is essentially the only program service of the organization and all of the revenues and expenses are considered to be for this purpose.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 56
- Accountability: 9
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd 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: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 43%; rating input score 43; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.8%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.91; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 0 of 16 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $295K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 43/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.