Healthy to Our Kids Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274347681
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- Wildomar, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9516009571
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health, General and Financing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $153,447
- Expenses
- $156,445
- Assets
- $74
- Liabilities
- $1,381
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRYAN LYNTON (President)
Highest reported compensation
- BRYAN LYNTON (President): $21,645 total reported compensation
- ADELLE LYNTON (Treasurer): $3,500 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To create a healthy environment for children by offering health & fitness opportunities, nutrition advice, community service opportunities, mentoring, athletic/scholastic guidance, water safety and aquatic activities.
What it reported doing in 2018
The program teaches water polo to boys and girls ages 6-18+ year round. Participants learn skills, strategies, individual/team offense and defense, conditioning, sportsmanship, and rules of the sport. Participants also participate in scrimmages, tournaments and national and international events. The goal is to introduce and develop the youth in the community to the sport of water polo. Training focuses on developing strong and confident student athletes that perform to the best of their ability in all aspects in their life. Proper sportsmanship and rules of proper conduct are reinforced routinely. Our hope is that athletes will always regard water polo as a very positive and enjoyable experience.
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
SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 33
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.1%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- 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: -2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 18.66; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -36.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85.1% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.