Plumbing Heating Cooling Contractors of the Redwood Empire

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680261676
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Petaluma, CA, USA
Phone
7076581041
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$94,884
Expenses
$110,902
Assets
$190,029
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Roman Scanagatta (President)
  • Conor Crawford (Vice President)
  • Jake Newman (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Roman Scanagatta (President)
  • Conor Crawford (Vice President)
  • Laura Lee Pokovich (Secretary/Treasurer)

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

Industry trade training

What it reported doing in 2025

All expenses are related to supporting ongoing industry trade training of members and their employees. Plumbing code classes were held weekly for 25 consecutive weeks and specialized classes are offered throughout the year. Approximately 25 contractor members are served by training their employees. Members also attend monthly business sessions that were held in person and via zoom technology. The association exists to train members as well as promote standards and professionalism with the plumbing & HVAC industries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.9%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.