Applewood Knolls Swim & Tennis Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840567334
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Wheat Ridge, CO, USA
Phone
3032380341
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$215,061
Expenses
$211,916
Assets
$354,798
Liabilities
$147,066

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL ZARLENGO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RICK ASSMUS (VICE PRESIDE)
  • MEGAN CHAPMAN (TREASURER/DI)
  • LAUREN EDDY (SOCIAL CHAIR)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Swim and tennis club

What it reported doing in 2019

Swim and tennis club - lessons for both activities available to members and non-members. Free swimming and tennis courts for members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 72.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.4% of revenue deployed · 99.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2019
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.