Bowling Proprietors Association of America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450372398
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
West Fargo, ND, USA
Phone
7013617983
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,007
Expenses
$33,849
Assets
$37,132
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Renee Shirley (President)
  • Brad Peterson (Vice President)
  • Nadine Swee (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Renee Shirley (President)
  • Brad Peterson (Vice President)
  • Nadine Swee (Executive 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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Conduct several bowling tournaments, including showcase events to improve bowling's image for greater customer participation and an inducement. Conventions and Meetings: Attend or conduct conventions and seminars to keep membership on top of new products, updated procedures and the newest in promotion ideas. Scholarships: conduct a program of scholarship awards for both boys and girls in bowling across the state of North Dakota

What it reported doing in 2020

Conducting bowling tournaments, run a scholarship program, attend and conduct seminars to advance the knowledge of bowling

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.