Amateur Athletic Union of the United States Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474519824
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Daly City, CA, USA
Phone
5105010685
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports Competitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,868
Expenses
$71,806
Assets
$66
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Constante Carlo Calacal (Athletic Director/Head Coach)
  • Arceny Calacal (Operations, Events and Administration)
  • Guillermio Olimpiada (Coach)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We provide the youth in our community to participate in an AAU Club Basketball Team at an affordable fee. Our primary mission is to promote the continued development of young players as it relates to fundamentals of basketball, sportsmanship and athletic competition. This will be achieved through participation in tournaments and competing at the highest level possible. Coaching each player in reaching their maximum potential and contribution in the game of basketball and in transforming those skills from the hardwood today to become leaders in our communities tomorrow.

What it reported doing in 2016

Provided discounts and scholarships to most of the low income families in order for the players to continue their participation with our basketball teams.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 12
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.7%; rating input score 12
  • Program expense ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 12

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 45.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 177.1% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 11.7% of revenue deployed · 11.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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.

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 12/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.