Belmont 2Nd Soccer Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161739344
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Belmont, MA, USA
Phone
6174892346
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,659
Expenses
$20,100
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES CONROY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLES CONROY (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID HAMER (VICE PRESIDE)
  • DONOVAN HUDSON (TREASURER/CL)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of this association shall be to foster, promote, and advance youth soccer for all residents of belmont with children in grades k through 2nd: to inspire, develop, and maintain the interest in soccer by belmont residents.

What it reported doing in 2018

Organize, assist and conduct a soccer program for belmont k-2 in the fall and spring each year. Cooperate with the belmont recreation department in its conduct of these programs for belmont residents. Encourage activities that will stimulate interest in belmont soccer programs. Conduct such other activities necessary in carrying out the goals and the programs of belmont second soccer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.7%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 64.2%; rating input score 64

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 56.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -33.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -35.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.7% of revenue deployed · 64.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.