Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley
Legal name: Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley Advocacy Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 842750166
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Fresno, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5592337161
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $73,500
- Expenses
- $55,618
- Assets
- $88,195
- Liabilities
- $3,451
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- CASEY CREAMER (Chairman)
- DARRIN MONTEIRO (Director)
- GEOFF VANDEN HEUVEL (Secretary)
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
Unifying the San Joaquin Valley's voice to advance an accessible, reliable solution for a balanced water future for all.
What it reported doing in 2025
Promotion of social welfare related to the use of water resources within California's san joaquin valley
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 24.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -13.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $54K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.