Reno Police Protective Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
886002678
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Reno, NV, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$207,651
Expenses
$171,618
Assets
$614,074
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS WADDLE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRYAN SCHUSTER (SECRETARY)
  • DAX SOTO (DIRECTOR)
  • CHRIS WADDLE (PRESIDENT)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide wage/benefit negotiations and greivance arbitrations for members.provide health and welfare benefits for members and enhance police department image within community

What it reported doing in 2020

Wage/benefit negotiations, labor and workplace regulations and grievences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, 0% for grants, and 37% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.4%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.58; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.3% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $153K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.