Mountain West Conference
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841472434
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, US
- Phone
- 7194884058
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports Competitions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $165,579,583
- Expenses
- $124,196,787
- Assets
- $50,612,590
- Liabilities
- $94,701
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- GLORIA NEVAREZ (COMMISSIONER): $1,208,997 total reported compensation
- CRAIG THOMPSON (FORMER COMMISSIONER (THRU 12/22)): $949,450 total reported compensation
- DR AMY PARSONS (DIRECTOR (THRU 5/25)): $894,164 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide administrative support for the thirteen member institutions to strengthen and expand the intercollegiate athletic and academic programs on each campus.
What it reported doing in 2024
Facilitate activities associated with intercollegiate athletic conferences. The mountain west provides a first-class athletic and academic experience for more than 5,100 student-athletes each year. Over the past 18 years, 42 mountain west student-athletes have earned ncaa postgraduate scholarships, and since the league's inception in 1999, an additional 36 student-athletes have been named mw scholar-athlete of the year and awarded league-sponsored postgraduate scholarships. Four mountain west student-athletes have earned distinction as rhodes scholars (jessica mellinger, Wyoming and delavane diaz, brittany morreale and rebecca esselstein, air force).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 89% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 18
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $115.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.5M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 24 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 25 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.
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.