National Correctional Employee Union
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 261637561
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Northampton, MA, USA
- Phone
- 4137886238
- Rating
- 38
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Labor Unions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,011,404
- Expenses
- $1,013,876
- Assets
- $79,166
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher Murphy (President)
- Christopher Murphy (President)
- John Sibya (Vice President)
- Manual Luna (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Christopher Murphy (President): $157,443 total reported compensation
- Dylan Lucas (clerk): $81,402 total reported compensation
- Angel Cotto (Treasurer): $69,190 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 legal and union representation for work related contract disputes. To bargain for better benefits, wages, and working conditions for members.
What it reported doing in 2024
The national union is committed to serve the interests of the membership by maintaining a union that is strong, democratic, and free of corruption. The union provided legal and other support to over 600 members in various correctional employee unions in multiple states.
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
REVIEW - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.