Carmel Dads Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237173843
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carmel, IN, USA
Phone
3178461663
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Centers, Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,314,643
Expenses
$3,732,770
Assets
$7,681,050
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACK BEERY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACK BEERY (PRESIDENT): $232,722 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the carmel dads club is to foster the development of youth in sports-related programs, and to build self-esteem, physical fitness, respect, and achievement through a diverse level of sports. The club provides inclusive involvement of members by being a caring organization, one that is modeled around sportsmanship, fair play, and participant safety. The organization works to build effective citizenship in members through trust, active communication, and enthusiasm.

What it reported doing in 2024

The carmel dads club serves more than 5,500 families in the carmel/clay area. The club gives more than 11,000 children ranging in age from pre-kindergarten to high school an opportunity to participate in various sports annually. Three sport tracks are offered via a recreation league, a travel league and a special sports program. The recreation league allows youth athletes to have fun and simultaneously learn teamwork, sportsmanship and leadership skills. The travel league allows more competitive youngsters to hone their skills by competing against teams from other geographic areas. The special sports program provides tailored programs for children with emotional and physical impairments. The sports offered by the carmel dads club include soccer, baseball, softball, football, basketball, rugby, lacrosse, cheerleading, golf, and volleyball. As a not-for-profit organization, funding comes from membership dues, sports registration fees, team sponsorships, concession sales, and donations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 79% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.9% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $233K · 19 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.