Atlanta Community Tennis Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581609097
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Peachtree Corners, GA, USA
Phone
7704164333
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,277,112
Expenses
$1,111,242
Assets
$1,465,985
Liabilities
$37,911

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEETH GARAGESHWARA (PRESIDENT)
  • KARA TUCKER (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HEATHER COTTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HANNAH KIDD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHANNON ROWE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID WATERBURY (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY O'CONNELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $107,338 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of usta atlanta (the atlanta community tennis association) is to promote and develop the growth of tennis in metro atlanta. Usta atlanta oversees the largest usta leagues and usta jr. Team tennis league programs in the country.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide local league tennis recreation, at a minimal cost; however, generally usta membership is required.. - community engagement & visibility - cultivate a vibrant tennis community across atlanta by expanding usta's membership base and fostering greater participation in the sport.- strengthen facility partnerships - increase access to tennis facilities that can accommodate a broad range of events across atlanta through strategic partnerships and facility development.- volunteer development - develop a robust, engaged base of volunteers dedicated to supporting usta's programs and events to grow tennis in atlanta.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.2%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.9%; rating input score 88; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 24th 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: 13%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.2% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $896K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.