Innercity Tennis Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
416038537
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6128256844
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,381,064
Expenses
$3,965,676
Assets
$4,158,216
Liabilities
$697,698

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN WHEATON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN WHEATON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $243,645 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Innercity tennis foundation (ict), founded in 1952, is on a mission to unleash and develop the potential of youth on and off the tennis court by engaging and serving a supportive community. (see schedule o)the foundation uses tennis as a vehicle to engage youth and provide coaching, mentoring, and life skills development to youth at ict's tennis center and all through minneapolis in parks, schools, and partner locations.

What it reported doing in 2024

National junior tennis & learning programs: innercity tennis (ict) is a member of the usta foundation's national junior tennis and learning network, a network made up of nonprofit youth development organizations that offer free or low-cost tennis and education programming to under-resourced youth. As such, ict leverages tennis to create opportunities for minneapolis youth to achieve positive social, emotional, and physical growth. Our coach-led youth development programs emphasize three core areas: physical activity, mentorship, and community belonging. Research indicates that physically active youth are less likely to engage in risky behaviors, while strong mentoring relationships and a sense of belonging enhance academic achievement, emotional well-being, and reduce delinquency. These factors collectively contribute to decreased violence by alleviating stress, promoting conflict resolution skills, and fostering positive social connections.our flagship youth tennis programs include: tennis in the schools: this program offers top-tier youth development through tennis in partnership with minneapolis schools and other organizations at no cost. It is structured into three components: in-school programming: through the school year, ict coaches work in two minneapolis public schools daily for 4-8 weeks, monday through thursday, providing 3-6 hours of tennis instruction in collaboration with mps physical education teachers.after-school programming: ict coaches lead after-school tennis clubs for elementary and middle schools in partnership with the community education and extended day networks.summer programming: ict coaches provided tennis enrichment at eight sites for minneapolis public schools summer students.tennis in the parks: in 2024, tennis in the parks was held at 24 minneapolis parks, continuing to be one of the city's most accessible and impactful youth development programs through sports.super saturdays: super saturdays is a three-hour, multi-sport program for 130 children ages 3-18, held twice a month on saturday afternoons. This volunteer-driven program is entirely free for participants.cities academy: cities academy offers a year-round, out-of-school-time tennis program for developing and competitive youth players, with substantial need-based scholarships available to support participation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 71% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.4% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $244K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $294K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.