Madison County Ground Water District

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820528131
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Rexburg, ID, USA
Phone
2083130972
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$260,034
Expenses
$237,025
Assets
$723,340
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM ERIKSON (Vice President)
  • BEVAN JEPPESEN (President)

People named in this filing

  • JASON WEBSTER (Director)
  • TOM ERIKSON (Vice President)
  • MIKE HUSKINSON (Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide legal protection and water mitigation support for its underground water irrigation members located in the eastern part of Madison County by purchasing water for mitigation and water recharge rights contained in the current agreement between the district and the Idaho Department of Water resources.

What it reported doing in 2025

The District collects assessments from members on a per irrigated acre basis and participates with the Idaho Ground Water Association, and Fremont Madison Water District to protect members water rights. The assessments are used to share the cost of legal protection and in purchasing water for mitigation and water recharge rights contained in the current agreement between the district and the Idaho Department of Water resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.05; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $236K 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: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.