Terrace Water Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951289760
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Colton, CA, USA
Phone
9098255224
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,025,258
Expenses
$1,377,086
Assets
$10,275,158
Liabilities
$305,699

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE MURPHY (Vice President)
  • LAURA CORRAL-FLORES (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • YVETTE BYNUM (Secretary): $3,000 total reported compensation
  • MIKE MURPHY (Vice President): $3,000 total reported compensation
  • ABBY FLORES (Treasurer): $3,000 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 provide water to shareholders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% 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: 90
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 42
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -34.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.46; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.