Vineyard Estates Mutual Water Company Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943104879
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Hollister, CA, USA
Phone
4086490023
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Public Utilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,008
Expenses
$41,750
Assets
$134,192
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Deborah Hernandez (President)
  • Tami Aviles (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Deborah Hernandez (President)
  • Tami Aviles (CEO)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

What is the organizations primary exempt purpose? We are a 501c (12) small mutual water company. All member fees collected are for: (1) Ensuring the water system is meeting all of the Federal and State requirements and (2) ensuring the water is safe for consumption by maintaining and making the necessary repairs and/or upgrades to the system.

What it reported doing in 2025

We are a small water system providing water service to the community consisting of 26 homes. Expenses incurred are for professional services repairs and maintenance of the water system ensuring the water system is safe for consumption for our customers and we are meeting all of the Federal and State requirements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.21; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.