Central Valley Community Sports Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473325944
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5594861056
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Recreational Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,789,449
Expenses
$1,910,810
Assets
$1,455,936
Liabilities
$2,685,566

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERANCE FRAZIER (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERANCE FRAZIER (President): $175,000 total reported compensation
  • JP GENTRY (Director): $55,982 total reported compensation
  • ALYSSA FRAZIER (Director): $16,156 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Form 990 - organization's missionthe primary purpose of this corporation shall be to promote a healthy, livable community with opportunities for physical actvity as well as personal and cultureal enrichment through the acquisition, expansion and operation of a community recreation center that will provide a wide range of community programs. The organization was formed in an effort to help alleviate the food-hardship and obesity rates in California's central valley. It owns and operates the central valley community recreation center and provides a much-needed "clean-air" recreational outlet for residents of the central valley. The organization provides space for local nonprofits that are already well-established in the area but need access to recreational, office and storage space and a center out of which to provide their services to the local community.form 990, part vi, line 11b - organization's process to review form 990an officer of the organization will distribute draft copies of

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided services to other non-profit partners by providing facilities and co-sponsoring activities for the central cal baseball academy, California adaptive sports program, big brothers & big sisters of central California, boys and girls club of fresno, the city of fresno, fresno economic opportunities commission, central California regional obesity prevention program, fresno police athletic league

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.84; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.