C4 Volleyball Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464291207
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Harrison, TN, USA
Phone
4235901203
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports Competitions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$153,813
Expenses
$151,663
Assets
$1,494
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DAVE SHUMAKER (DIRECTOR)
  • JOANNA SHUMAKER (DIRECTOR)
  • PATRICIA FLOWERS (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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Club sport for community

What it reported doing in 2014

C4 volleyball club offers volleyball training and tournament opportunities to girls, ages 18 and under. The students who participate in the organization not only receive volleyball training, but they also receive coaching that emphasizes the 4 "c"s: character, competitiveness, conditioning, and college selection & recruitment. Several students who participated in c4 volleyball club were able to receive college volleyball scholarships to further their education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • 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: 1.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd 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 · $161K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.