Delaware Soccer Officials Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270214002
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Yorklyn, DE, USA
Phone
3025983274
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$332,145
Expenses
$347,761
Assets
$2,690
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tyler Edelman (President)
  • Kassra Oskooli (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kyle Radziewicz (Referee Game Assignor): $13,191 total reported compensation
  • Douglas Adamson (Treasurer): $6,252 total reported compensation
  • Tyler Edelman (Sub Referee Game Assignor): $4,956 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 DSOA is to promote the athletic endeavors of educational and community organizations that participate in the support of soccer. DSOA fully embraces "education through athletics", and will provide officials for athletic contests or events that support this endeavor

What it reported doing in 2024

Provides soccer referee services in the Fall mid-September to early November (boys) and Spring mid-March to early June (girls) for most public and private Delaware High Schools, Middle Schools and selected Church Youth Organizations located in New Castle, Kent and Sussex Counties in Delaware.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 41
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 42.9%; rating input score 43; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -39.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $348K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $13K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.