Indianapolis Tennis and Education Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237361641
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3172595377
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$313,145
Expenses
$249,930
Assets
$1,480,477
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLISON COPELAND (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA S WYNNE (CHAIRMAN OF): $11,308 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Designed to teach tennis as a lifetime sport to be enjoyed for recreational pleasure and to offer the opportunities to those who wish to excel as competitive players. To use the sport of tennis to teach life skills to youth and adults, create opportunities for personal improvement to youth and adults; to assist and help underprivileged youth through its programs, and to promote, improve and build tennis facilities on metropolitan school district of Washington township properties, as well as teach tennis programs that enhance and assist metroploitan school district of Washington township's mission to educate the youth of Washington township in indianapolis.

What it reported doing in 2024

Spring summer program: includes summer day camps that provide tennis training and other activities. This also includes a free program for kids within msd Washington township, where they meet once a week for 8 weeks at no cost to families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.2%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 20.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.92; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.5%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.2% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $151K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.