Yuma County Water Users' Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860069710
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Yuma, AZ, USA
Phone
9286278824
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Utilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,324,888
Expenses
$12,666,945
Assets
$59,003,408
Liabilities
$17,207,864

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICK DINSMORE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HANK AUZA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TOM DAVIS (MANAGER): $265,210 total reported compensation
  • PERLA GARCIA (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $158,855 total reported compensation
  • HANK AUZA (PRESIDENT): $41,077 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Promotion of social welfare.

What it reported doing in 2025

The yuma county water users' association has continued to provide and improve the water supply for a particular geographic area. These activities have improved the living conditions for the landowners, as well as for the people who live and work in the area. The yuma county water users' association also provides water to the city of yuma for the betterment of the community. The yuma county water users' association continues to pump ground water, which has improved and maintained the soil condition for the benefit of the whole geographic area. The yuma county water users' association has continued to maintain the siphon drop power plant (a natural hydroelectric power generator), as contracted by the united states government.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.66; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.9% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $265K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.