Hckc Inc Hill Country Kart Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010564483
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2014
Location
New Braunfels, TX, USA
Phone
5126655501
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sports Associations &Training Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$58,114
Expenses
$39,638
Assets
$35,825
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL VOLKMANN (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN MUELLER (PRESDIENT)
  • MICHAEL VOLKMANN (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • GINA GRIFFITH (SECRETARY)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To foster national amateur sports competition in go-kart racing b) primarily to conduct national or international competition in the sport of go-kart racing or to support and develop amateur athletes(drivers) for that competition.

What it reported doing in 2015

We conducted 21 local races and qualifing events. We had 898 athletes compete in local races as well as regional and national championships.

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 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.5%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 27.2%; rating input score 27

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.5% of revenue deployed · 27.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.