Corona Youth Tennis League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330319261
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Corona, CA, USA
Phone
9513714371
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,036
Expenses
$24,309
Assets
$1,027
Liabilities
$4,301

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Felix Colffer (President)
  • Deborah Colffer (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Arianna Colffer (Director): $3,810 total reported compensation
  • Felix Colffer (President): $3,000 total reported compensation
  • Deborah Colffer (Vice President): $800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We believe that sports, and in particular tennis, is vital for personal andphysical development and connect the individual to the larger world. Throughphysical exploration, tennis offers opportunities for these children to believein who they are. This belief becomes the seed from which personal and athleticgrowth explodes, allowing students to excel not only on the tennis court, but also in their personal lives.

What it reported doing in 2020

CYTL offers affordable tennis skills classes, year-round for the youth ages 5-17 inthe city of Corona and surrounding areas. We offer "Match Play League" for skillclass graduates. The players and families make connections and work together to mentor and support all of the individuals. CYTL donates money and tennis equipmentto two of the local high school tennis programs, as well as offered three scholarships for students whose family had financial need. In addition, CYTL sponsored a monthly senior luncheon and provided desserts. Many of the former players come back to volunteer as tennis assistants, score keepers, line judges and coaches.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.19; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.1% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.