Georgia Soccer Officials Assoc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581821927
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- Cumming, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4048057369
- Rating
- 33
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,164,792
- Expenses
- $1,149,679
- Assets
- $144,077
- Liabilities
- $26,528
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Patrick Baker (2nd Vice President for Referees)
- ALTON TANJU (1st Vice President for Schools)
- MARK SWEATT (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Alvin Johnston (Commissioner): $10,632 total reported compensation
- Tom Sconzo (Commissioner): $10,557 total reported compensation
- Glen LaFlamme (Commissioner): $4,908 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Georgia Soccer Officials Association's (GSOA) mission is to establish an organization to implement and maintain a high level of high school soccer officiating for Georgia High School Association (GHSA) registered soccer officials. To contractually provide game assignment services to GSOA members. To contractually provide soccer officials booking services to Georgia High Schools upon request. To study and improve the technique of soccer officiating. To promote the uniform interpretation and administration of the Official High School Soccer Rules as adopted by GHSA. To encourage and establish the place of high school soccer as a game for the development of character and good sportsmanship. To promote the recruitment and training of all individuals interested in officiating high school soccer. To work with all other organizations, public and private, interested in the advancement of all aspects of the game of high school soccer.
What it reported doing in 2020
Gsoa trains and provides soccer referees for high school soccer matches.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 9
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 1.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.