Gainesville Area Community Tennis Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542158508
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3527582435
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,198,551
Expenses
$561,531
Assets
$813,236
Liabilities
$11,033

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eric Lanham (Interim Executive Director)
  • Aldreka Everette (Executive Director)
  • Elizabeth Smith (Vice President)
  • Dr Dakeyan Graham (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Eric Lanham (Interim Executive Director): $62,153 total reported compensation
  • Aldreka Everette (Executive Director): $47,077 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote health, academic achivement and character development through tennis.

What it reported doing in 2025

Academic Programming The academic component holds the largest emphasis in our programming, as we believe education is foundational to a students success. Academic support is provided in the way of tutoring, in-school assistance in classrooms and administration, and providing resources such as computers and material to complete homework and projects. Our fulltime Academic Director works with the caregivers and school district to monitor and track academic outcomes such as grades, GPA, attendance, and behavior reports to provide a holistic approach to the students success. The College and Career program at AIM offers standardized test preparation, college application and scholarship assistance, college visits, and services for students following their graduation to ensure successful transition. Parental involvement in their childs educational process is a requirement for participation in the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.5%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.5% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $485K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.