Clarksville Country Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620434397
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Clarksville, TN, USA
Phone
9316475674
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,464,372
Expenses
$2,501,613
Assets
$3,049,364
Liabilities
$3,365,807

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WALTON SMITH (Vice President)
  • KEITH BENNETT (President)

People named in this filing

  • TIM CROCKER (Director)
  • TOM EDWARDS (Director)
  • WALTON SMITH (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. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Social club

What it reported doing in 2016

Operation of a community social club

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: -1.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.