Falcon Pride Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450464213
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Bayville, NY, USA
Phone
9176992678
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,684
Expenses
$12,013
Assets
$135,958

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN AJOHNSON (President/Sec)

People named in this filing

  • GARY TERRELL (Vice Pres/Sec)
  • JOHN AJOHNSON (President/Sec)
  • RICK PISCIOTTA (Treasurer)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support athletic programs at the locust valley middle and high schools in nassau county and to support young athletes participating in sporting events.funds are used for capital expenditures that benefits various sports.

What it reported doing in 2024

Raised funds to support various athletic programs by providing equipment, tournament and scoreboard expenses, etc. The sporting events played before an audience are an essential part of the students' training and related to the exempt purpose of the organization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -613.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.32; rating input score 93; 93rd 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: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -42.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.