Believe to Achieve Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463499005
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Folsom, CA, USA
Phone
9167164508
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,092
Expenses
$57,550
Assets
$11,821

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JARED R ELLISON (President)

People named in this filing

  • JARED R ELLISON (President)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purposes of the Corporation are exclusively charitable within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Code. Specifically, the Corporation is organized to promote and support youth development through athletic events, and to support philanthropic endeavors of other exempt organizations. The goal of the Corporation is to help youth achieve their athletic goals and to compete in athletic events for charitable purposes while promoting a healthy lifestyle, work ethic, and awareness and responsibilities in our youth.

What it reported doing in 2015

Entered and participated in a number of bike tours with 19 youth riders

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 assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • 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: 14.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 41.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.