Athletes Helping Athletes Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330906265
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8589744454
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $176,604
- Expenses
- $157,179
- Assets
- $118,308
- Liabilities
- $4,702
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Michael Gotfredson (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Michael Gotfredson (President): $267,067 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Athletes Helping Athletes (AHA) provides adaptive bikes to children with permanent physical disabilities who are 18 years and younger that can self-propel without assistance.For the last several years AHA has specialized in covering either:1) 100% of the cost of handcycles for youths under the age of 18 whose families would not be able to afford those handcycles without the assistance of AHA; and,2) to the extent possible, splitting the cost with other qualified charitable organizations for some of the handcycles, thereby increasing AHA's reach (AHA can obtain handcycles from manufacturers sometimes at an approximate 30% discount to cost and then typically funds approximately one-half the remaining cost after contributions made by other qualifying charitable organizations, thereby increasing AHA's reach to additional children).
What it reported doing in 2024
Grants were provided to children with permanent disabilities that were under the age of 18. The grants took the form of adaptive hand cycles to enable those children to be physically active and to compete in appropriate types of sporting events.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.5%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 99.3%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: $795.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 11%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.5% of revenue deployed · 99.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $156K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 2 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.