Canal Winchester Recreation Org

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800711874
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Canal Winchester, OH, USA
Phone
6148379380
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreation& Sports N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,179
Expenses
$10,023
Assets
$3,837
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • VAL WEBSTER (DIRECTOR)
  • KEITH LEWIS (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Administer programs which provide athletic, recreational and quality of life opportunities for the civic and community welfare, social improvement and physical development of the youth resident of the canal winchester school district as well as the city of canal winchester.

What it reported doing in 2014

Administer programs which provide athletic, recreational and quality of life opportunities for the civic and community welfare, social improvements and physical development of the youth residents of the canal winchester school district as well as the city of canal winchester. The organization will promote and educate youth on the best ideals of athletic competition including the concepts of mutual respect, self-confidence, teamwork, fundamentals and development of sportsmanlike attitudes toward competition, all in an age-appropriate manner.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.9%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -215.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -194.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -68.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -119.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.9% of revenue deployed · 31% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.