Athletes Chasing Greatness
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 922158935
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Franklin, TN, USA
- Phone
- 6152433758
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $371,926
- Expenses
- $298,046
- Assets
- $100,734
- Liabilities
- $1,703
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GREGG TIPTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- GREGG TIPTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $180,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
At athletes chasing greatness, our mission is to challenge athletes and coaches to pursue jesus and their unique purpose with passion and to invite others to join in this pursuit.
What it reported doing in 2024
We encourage athletes and coaches to integrate their faith with their sport by prioritizing the pursuit of jesus and one's unique purpose as central to the athletic journey and, ultimately, achieving greatness.acg encourages individuals to approach their athletic pursuits with a more profound sense of meaning and purpose, beyond just the physical and competitive aspects of the sport. By integrating faith and values into athletic pursuits, they will be better equipped to handle the challenges and pressures that come with their sport and in life, while also being positive role models for others in their communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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: 44
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.2%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 52.7%; rating input score 53
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 19.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 129.6% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 98.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.2% of revenue deployed · 52.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $157K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 5 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.