Arizona Coyotes Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861021459
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Glendale, AZ, USA
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Corporate Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$696,886
Expenses
$624,087
Assets
$192,930
Liabilities
$25,547

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Olivia Matos (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Andrew Barroway (Board Chairman)
  • Olivia Matos (Executive Director)

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

Overview

Mission

The Arizona Coyotes Foundation seeks to enhance the quality of life throughout Arizona communities by supporting non-profit organizations that promote healthcare, education, cultural arts, and sports-related programs for children and adults.

What it reported doing in 2016

The Arizona Coyotes Foundation conducted charitable events and other fund raising activities throughout the year to raise money and subsequently donate those funds in support of other non-profit organizations that promote healthcare, education, cultural arts, and sports-related programs for children and adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The strongest available result is that a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.5%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.5% of revenue deployed · 60.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $380K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.