Anaheim Hills Rotary
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953996472
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Anaheim Hills, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7143668145
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Service Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $39,171
- Expenses
- $36,264
- Assets
- $31,198
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TRACEY CLARK (President)
- TONY SIRAGUSA (PRESIDENT ELECT)
People named in this filing
- TRACEY CLARK (President)
- HARRY CHARM (Secretary)
- DARREN CHU (Treasurer)
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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To encourage and foster the ideal of service as a basis of worthy enterprise and, in particular, to encourage and foster:1. The development of acquaintances as an opportunity for service;2. High ethical standards in business and professions;3. The application of the ideal of service by every rotarian to his/her personal, business and community life;4. The advancement of international understanding, goodwill, and peace through a world fellowship of business and professional men and women united in the ideal of service.
What it reported doing in 2014
Donated funds to various members in the community incuding: books donated to elementary school libraries rotary foundation water for sudanmultiple community services
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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.7%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7.4%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 50.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66.7% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.