Water Employees Association of Nevada

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880185405
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7024998687
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,201
Expenses
$16,442
Assets
$669,550
Liabilities
$3,976

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANK DE LUNA (Vice President)
  • KYONG KIM (President)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES BAINES (Director)
  • DEMTRIO LUCERO (Director)
  • FRANK DE LUNA (Vice President)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Contract negotiation, representation and arbitration for approximately 260 members

What it reported doing in 2025

To represent the field unit employees of the las vegas valley water district in the general las vegas, Nevada area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.1%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 61.8%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 77.2%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 40.72; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.1% of revenue deployed · 61.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.