Cherry Creek Soccer Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840750699
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Aurora, CO, USA
Phone
3033995858
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,803,721
Expenses
$2,322,377
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER PAK (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PETER PAK (PRESIDENT)
  • TED LEONARD (TREASURER)
  • EVAN HUSNEY (SECRETARY)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide a positive soccer environment that supports the development of every player.

What it reported doing in 2018

To teach the game of soccer and promote good sportsmanship and physical fitness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.4%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 39.7%; rating input score 40; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 17.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.4% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.