Horseshoe Volleyball Club
Legal name: Horseshoe Volleyball Club Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 842772234
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lock Haven, PA, United States
- Phone
- (814) 935-1039
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Baseball, Softball
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $312,847
- Expenses
- $311,836
- Assets
- $20,203
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL KRAFT (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- KENNETH STREILEIN (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL KRAFT (VICE-PRESIDENT): $3,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the club is to raise the level of competitive volleyball at the high school level in the Central Pennsylvania area. Our goal is to assist players to increase their skill level and provide the best club experience in which players, parents and coaches are valued and supported. The Horseshoe Volleyball Club was formed by Bob Kasun and Ken Streilein in 2010. After several years of running our own club with players from the high school teams that we coached, we felt that we could increase our teams’ competitive level by forming an area-wide club. The club would be open to players from any school district. In the most recent club season (2019-20), we had over 20 school districts represented in our club! Our goal is to assist players to increase...
What it reported doing in 2024
Competitive volleyball teams and seasonal programming the organization operates competitive volleyball teams for youth athletes in central Pennsylvania, offering structured training, coaching, and participation in regional tournaments. Teams are organized by age and skill level and participate in organized leagues and competitive events throughout the year. Activities include:-regular team practices led by experienced coaches.-participation in regional and multi-state tournaments.-skill development focused on technical, tactical, and physical training.-character-building through teamwork, sportsmanship, and leadership development.during the year, the organization served a significant number of youth athletes through its team-based programming and facilitated participation in numerous competitive events.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 81% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.1%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th 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: Limited
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 97.1% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $304K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.