New Mexico Ground Water Association -Nmgwa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850251319
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Westerville, OH, USA
Phone
6148987791
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,959
Expenses
$127,190
Assets
$148,608
Liabilities
$27,379

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chance Coats (President)
  • Joel Stewart (Vice President)
  • Larry Jewell (Past President)
  • Dave Schulenberg (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Chance Coats (President)
  • Joel Stewart (Vice President)
  • Joseph Villanueva (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To assist, promote, encourage, and support the interest and welfare of the water 28a well industry in New Mexico by promoting scientific education, standards, research, and techniques.

What it reported doing in 2025

To assist, promote, encourage, and support the interest and welfare of the water well industry in New Mexico by promoting scientific education, standards, research, and techniques.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.7%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 21.2%; rating input score 21

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -49.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.7% of revenue deployed · 21.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.