Snwa Water Efficiency Improvement Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923096788
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7022583876
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,082
Expenses
$100,186
Assets
$406,478
Liabilities
$401,522

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • COLBY PELLEGRINO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • COLBY PELLEGRINO (PRESIDENT): $424,794 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN BETHEL (TREASURER): $415,162 total reported compensation
  • ZANE MARSHALL (SECRETARY): $388,846 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To partner with sustainability-minded, private sector companies to identify and fund water efficiency improvement projects in southern Nevada.

What it reported doing in 2024

The snwa water efficiency improvement fund was created to provide private sector businesses opportunities to financially support water efficiency projects in southern Nevada, demonstrating environmental stewardship and innovations in conservation. The fund exists to link on-the-ground conservation projects with companies in support of their environmental stewardship goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.06; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 340.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 139.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 83.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -21.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $78K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $425K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.