United Steelworkers Local-652

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820229390
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Idaho Falls, ID, USA
Phone
2085236229
Rating
29
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$428,919
Expenses
$390,819
Assets
$787,655
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT CHAVEZ (PRESIDENT)
  • QUINT K LINDSAY (UNIT PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER O YOUNG (UNIT PRESIDENT)
  • BEAU J FREESTONE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HENRY G LITTLEFORD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATT CHAVEZ (PRESIDENT): $27,265 total reported compensation
  • EUGENE M SCOTT (FINANCIAL SECRETARY): $14,371 total reported compensation
  • QUINT K LINDSAY (UNIT PRESIDENT): $11,124 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission statement of the orgination includes, but is not limited to, on behalf of its members, collective barganing, grievance procedures, arbitration, strike benefits, education, organize and to improve the working conditions of its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

The local union continues in an ongoing effort to defend and enforce the negotiated collective barganing agreement for our members wages, benefits and working conditions.the memberss dues, related income and expebses are used to carry out these activities. The local union is continually striving to maintain or accomplish improvements for our members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 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: 64
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 56
  • 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; 64th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -22.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% 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: 0 of 705 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.