Cedar Valley Derby Divas
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900592949
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2011
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2011
- Location
- Waverly, IA, USA
- Phone
- 3198307427
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $55,749
- Expenses
- $24,784
- Assets
- $30,965
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of cedar valley derby divas is to further the sport of women's flat track roller derby; while promoting the personal growth and development of each derby sister. Cedar valley derby divas is a vehicle by which we hope to provide the women of the cedar valley the opportunity to be a part of a truly unique athletic experience. We aim to develop our skills, not only as fierce competitors, but also as productive members of our communities. Cedar valley derby divas will facilitate athletic development, good sportsmanship and will maintain a positive relationship with fellow roller derby leagues.cedar valley derby divas will actively support the communities of the cedar valley. All member of our league will foster and generate goodwill and community stewardship through our good works.
What it reported doing in 2011
Promote the sport of female flat track roller derby league and give back to the community through fundraising activities
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 84% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.5%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 55.5%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.25; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 41.5% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.