Lone Tree Mutual Water Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770268373
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
El Nido, CA, USA
Phone
2097223997
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,789,661
Expenses
$7,918,135
Assets
$11,956,573
Liabilities
$7,218,461

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richie Iest (President)
  • Roy Catania (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • George Park (Manager): $190,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the corporation is for the development, sale, distribution, supply and delivery of water for irrigation purposes to its members within the lands of its service area. It is also organized to assist in providing surface and subsruface drainage to the lands described in the service area, to undertake or promote soil, water and drainage conservation activities upon those lands, and to acquire, preserve and administer contractual and appropriative rights for irrigation water, and to distribute water available under the riparian rights of members, including the improvement of the land, to supply water for irrigation purposes.

What it reported doing in 2025

The corporation developed, sold, distributed, supplied, and delivered irrigation water to its members with irrigatable share-acres.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $190K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.