La Canada Wireless Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470908327
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Santa Fe, NM, USA
Phone
8005366149
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Local Benevolent Life Insurance Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$598,881
Expenses
$403,681
Assets
$613,823
Liabilities
$9,233

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOEL YELICH (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT HAUSMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOEL YELICH (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT HAUSMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EDDIE LEWIS (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association provides wireless internet service to its members who live and work in rural areas of santa fe county, New Mexico through a non-profit member-owned and operated community cooperative.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purhcasing, installing, and maintaining the necessary equipment of the wireless network is performed by volunteers of the membership and two technical consultants. The association contracts with one bookkeeper. In the current year, the vast majority of the association's revenue came from members, with a small amount coming from investment activity. The association grew to 859 members during the year as the coverage area was slightly expanded into more rural areas. The association continues to purchase and install new equipment in the infrastructure as needed. The association operated only one program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.6%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $288K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.