Ballout U
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 463875023
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Woodland Hills, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3109805027
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports Competitions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,810
- Expenses
- $3,810
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
People named in this filing
- CHANTA C WILSON (Director)
- WILLIAM HUDSON (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Balloutu bad boys domination is a youth amateur atheltic union basketball club. This club was formed to provide our youths with the highest quality of basketball training and competition
What it reported doing in 2013
Balloutu is an amateur athletic union basketball club that provides high quality basketball training and competition while requiring our youths to excel academically. Balloutu has developed relationships with private middle and high schools. These relationships are used to help our youths obtain a private school education with hopes that they will continue their education and attend a four year university.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 4 of 4 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.