Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 162 Apprenticeship Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237167938
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
9372238534
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,402,569
Expenses
$841,076
Assets
$1,738,782
Liabilities
$12,345

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK TERRILL (TRUSTEE): $212,977 total reported compensation
  • AUGUST KURTZ (TRUSTEE): $210,116 total reported compensation
  • RYAN HASKINS (COORDINATOR): $178,052 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The education trust fund was created for the purpose of establishing a school for the training of apprentices and journeymen and to adopt programs, plans, policies, rules, regulations, and procedures for the admission, education, and training of employees in the plumbing, pipe fitting, refrigeration, heating, air conditioning, and allied industries. The education trust fund was also created to sponsor and/or finance any activity which, in the opinion of the trustees will further the knowledge and skill of employees associated with the plumbing and pipe fitting industries.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization accomplished its mission of providing classroom and on the job training of individuals from the plumber, pipe fitters and refrigeration apprentices and continuing education for journeymen.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.3% of revenue deployed · 73.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $621K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.