Ice Jets Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861084493
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Irving, TX, USA
Phone
9725561190
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Winter Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,010,392
Expenses
$1,207,916
Assets
$246,964
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ice jets, inc. Was formed in august 2003 with a purpose of fostering, promoting and improving amateur youth ice hockey in the dallas/fort worth, Texas metropolitan area for charitable, educational and recreational purposes, including international competition. To further its purpose, the ice jets shall endeavor to (1) stimulate interest in amateur youth ice hockey, (2) develop and administer non profit youth ice hockey programs, (3) improve and promote the social mental and physical welfare of all the participants in the programs, and (4) provide youth with instruction and coaching in the sport of ice-hockey in an environment of good sportsmanship, fair play, and safety. The ice jets will carry out the duties and responsibilites of an organization affiliated with the Texas amateur hockey association and with USA hockey. In conducting its affairs, the ice jets will abide by the policies and rules of USA hockey or successor organizations.

What it reported doing in 2012

The ice jets have teams for ages 6-17. Tryouts are held annually to select players for each team. Players from all around the dallas/fort worth metroplex try out for the teams and are selected based upon skill level. Information regarding tryouts are posted on the website, flyers, and e-mails. For the 2012-2013 season, the ice jets had 14 teams with approximately 250 players participating. The ice jets emphasis is on skill development rather than winning. The ice jets teams spend approximately 80% of its time practicing skill development and approximately 20% of the time utilizing these skills in games. The ice jets seek coaches with professional experience to assure proper training and techniques. Based on the professional experience, head coaches may be paid. All other positions including assistant coaches, team managers, and organization administration are volunteer positions. Volunteers spend a substantial amount of time organizing practice shcedules, securing ice time, arranging games, and performing administrative activities for the organiziation and the teams. Most of the supplies necessary for the administrative activities are donated by the volunteers. The ice jets philosphy is that by encouraging skill development, the youth players will have a more enjoyable experience and maintain their interest in ice hockey. Proper skill development will also allow the teams to compete effectively in national and international amateur ice hockey competition. The ice jets conduct their practices at various rinks in the dallas/fort worth area. Games were played locally, nationally, or internationally depending upon the skill level of the team and the availability of relatively equal competition. The goal is to train players that can compete at the international level.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -19.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -13.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -34.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.