Federal Way United Soccer Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911765041
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Federal Way, WA, USA
Phone
2533330331
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$647,898
Expenses
$647,241
Assets
$272,799
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erik Johnson (Vice President)
  • Keli Bitow (Vice President)
  • Josh Cheatham (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rob Walker (Dir of Coach): $54,972 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Coaching for competition

What it reported doing in 2013

To provide various levels of competition and provide officiating for those games played on home field

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $527K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.