Onamac Maintenance Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911434935
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Stanwood, WA, USA
- Phone
- 3603874030
- Rating
- 32
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Mutual/Membership Benefit N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $353,599
- Expenses
- $145,255
- Assets
- $2,402,561
- Liabilities
- $1,093,842
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JON RICE (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DAVID BAXTER (VICE-PRESIDE)
- STEVE BOSKOVICH (WATER SYSTEM)
- PAM HINTHORNE (SECRETARY/TR)
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 collect homeowners dues, uphold the cc&r's. To act as a non-profit for the benefit of owners of real property without limiting the generality thereof, in particular, owners of lots. To acquire, construct, maintain and/or operate the following namely, (a) a domestic water system and distribute water therefrom to members of the said association, (b) a private water disposal system to dispose of waste from property owned by members of said association; (c) a roadway system of private roadways within the plat of onamac and adjacent thereto; (d) community beach areas and community beach improvements deeded or to be subsequently deeded to the association. To impose maintenance charges and hookup charges and levy assessments to be collected and used in furtherance of the purposes of the association in the manner and in the amount as may be provided in its bylaws.
What it reported doing in 2025
Collect homeowers dues, maintain common areas, uphold the cc&r's
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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 80
- Accountability: 6
- Sustainability: 80
- 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: 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th 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: 58.9%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.54; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -59.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 108 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $144K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 12 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.