Great Lakes Swing Dance Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 383092797
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Burton, MI, USA
- Phone
- 8103943118
- Rating
- 40
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,826
- Expenses
- $55,096
- Assets
- $23,287
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jim Vroman (President)
- Gary Wescott (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Patrick Tetreau (Secretary)
- Ernie Callard (Chairman)
- Jim Vroman (President)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Great Lakes Dance Swing Club is a social club whose purpose is to encourage, promote and enjoy swing dancing of all forms, while giving members the opportunity to get out of the house and meet new friends. While primarily a Swing Dance Organization, the club recognizes other forms of dance, including social and ballroom dancing.
What it reported doing in 2025
The GLDSC has approximately 50-60 dances a year and each includes an hour long dance lesson. The Club provides dance demonstrations and entertainment for local events, at senior centers and nursing homes. The Club collects money and other items to donate to various charities, such as childrens homes, womens shelters, the American Heart Association and many other charitable organizations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.2%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 28; 28th 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: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 1.2% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.