Cp Recreation Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161524328
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Niagara Falls, NY, USA
Phone
7169902006
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Camps

Reported finances

Revenue
$438
Expenses
$10,373
Assets
$10,023

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

People named in this filing

  • FLORENCE CASALE (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MARILYN MORREALE (SECRETARY)
  • JOHN PAUL (BOARD MEMBER)

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

Overview

Mission

Cp recreation group, inc. Provides social interaction and recreational activities for individuals afflicted with a variety of mental, physical or emotional disabilities. These would include, but not be limited to cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, mental illness, mental retardation, and victim of child abuse.

What it reported doing in 2018

Recreational and social activities - these activities include a 32 week bowling league for each individual wishing to participate. A small fee is charged to each person on a weekly basis to cover the cost of bowling and shoe rental. Food and beverages are provided free of charge. At the end of the season, the agency sponsors a bowling tournament and invites similar groups from other areas to participate.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,268.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.