Addison Community Athletics Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461164975
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Middlebury, VT, USA
Phone
8023883355
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$533,648
Expenses
$513,903
Assets
$1,831,842
Liabilities
$4,082

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID W IGNAT (PRESIDENT)
  • ELEANOR P IGNAT (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNA GRADY (SECRETARY): $180,680 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN MCDONOUGH (GENERAL MANAGER): $62,516 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote athletics and healthful behaviors throughout the greater addison county region of Vermont by supporting tennis and other health education programs for youth and adults.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation develops and supports programs that engage communities in the greater addison country region by offering tennis and other athletic activities at the foundation's indoor tennis facility, at local schools, and community courts. Through these programs, the foundation seeks to promote the health and well-being of children and adults in the greater addison country region of Vermont. The foundation provided complimentary services to local schools, students, and programs totaling $24,715 in 2024 and $12,225 in 2023, respectively.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.4%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 3.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.56; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.4% of revenue deployed · 45.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $233K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.