Smithfield Irrigation Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870177285
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Smithfield, UT, USA
Phone
4357700213
Rating
32
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,480
Expenses
$218,734
Assets
$2,295,320
Liabilities
$817

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LUANN HANSEN: $15,525 total reported compensation
  • LYLE COLEMAN: $12,122 total reported compensation
  • DARIN EVANS: $9,680 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide irrigation and yard care water

What it reported doing in 2024

Managed fees collected and paid bills pertaining to all activities for the shareholders

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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: 90
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

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; 64th 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; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.49; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 51.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.