Chippewa Valley Pickleball Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474180623
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Altoona, WI, USA
- Phone
- 7155790301
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Physical Fitness and Community Recreational Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $74,539
- Expenses
- $96,588
- Assets
- $81,318
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Karen McDermott (President)
- Carol Wilczek (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Michael Mai (Treasurer)
- Karen McDermott (President)
- Carol Wilczek (Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
It is the mission, duty and purpose of the Chippewa Valley Pickleball Club to address, educate and coordinate health and fitness in our area by promoting pickleball as a game anyone can play. We educate anyone who wants to learn how to play and to play safely. We encourage all ages to increase their health and physical fitness, but we are finding that the need for improving health and physical fitness among our more senior population is especially important. Besides physical fitness pickleball is a social game and our organization provides opportunities for players to engage in social activities both on and off the court
What it reported doing in 2025
Promoting Pickleball in the Chippewa Valley through running education programs and in partnership with the village of Lake Hallie maintaining pickleball courts and equipment
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 24
- Transparency & Controls: 91
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 25.8%; rating input score 26
- Program expense ratio: 19.9%; rating input score 20
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -29.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -112.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -23.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 25.8% of revenue deployed · 19.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.