Plumbing-heating-cooling Contractors of Iowa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421406679
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
West Des Moines, IA, USA
Phone
5152828192
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$735,220
Expenses
$561,409
Assets
$1,508,316
Liabilities
$528,681

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • COREY ACKERMAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN MILLARD (VICE PRESIDE): $24,600 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 organization is dedicated to the promotion, advancement, education, and training of the industry, for the protection of our environment and the health, safety, and comfort of society.

What it reported doing in 2024

Apprenticeship program - phcc operates a 4-year department of labor registered apprenticeship program for plumbing technicians and a 4-year department of labor registered apprenticeship program for heating/cooling technicians. Our apprenticeship program is recognized and certified by the united states department of labor/bureau of apprenticeship training and by license and code authorities that utilize the idol/bat standards. Students participating in a department of labor apprenticeship program must obtain 144 classroom hours and 2,000 on-the-job learning hours per year. At the successful completion of the apprenticeship program, students become skilled, certified journey-level workers and receive a nationally recognized certificate. They are also eligible to take the journeyperson test in Iowa to obtain their state license. A standing committee of phcc contractor members oversees the operation of our registered apprenticeship program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 79% 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

MIXED - 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: 92
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 68
  • 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: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $130K reported
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.