De Anza Force Soccer Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200428766
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
6504934443
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,661,081
Expenses
$2,485,668
Assets
$8,661,929
Liabilities
$1,319,076

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF BAICHER (Co-Pres & Dir.): $376,000 total reported compensation
  • ANDY PANAYIDES (Co-Pres & GM): $192,100 total reported compensation
  • NANCY PANAYIDES (Controller): $60,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the de anza force soccer club is to inspire and educate players at all levels to excel in athletics, academics, and life, while fostering community engagement through a commitment to core values. Renowned for its college placement success, the club has helped over 200 players advance to universities and colleges in the past five years. The organization is also considering developing its own facilities to better control field rental costs and reduce reliance on third-party venues.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide at least 4 hours per week of year-round soccer skills training and competition to over 750 youth athletes between the ages of 8 and 18.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 67
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.48; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $376K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $239K reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.