Israel Tennis Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
980423184
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Zomet Hkefar Hayarok, Ramat Hasharon, IS
Phone
9723645660
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,121,000
Expenses
$12,566,000
Assets
$16,828,000
Liabilities
$3,226,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

63 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANNY GELLY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANNY GELLY (CEO): $216,841 total reported compensation
  • Ari Strasberg (CFO): $141,044 total reported compensation
  • Ronen Morali (Director of high performance d): $119,650 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization was created for the purpose of teaching tennis to children and young people and to promote social integration among the young people in israel. Over the years, since the first center opened in 1976, more than 350,000 israeli children have participated in the organization's programs.

What it reported doing in 2014

The kindergarten program: implemented at hundreds of kindergartens throughout israel, the kindergarten program aims at improving motor skills such as balance and coordination in child ages 4-6, while promoting a healthy lifestyle from an early age. The program is implemented weekly by the itc's child education specialists at the kindergartens themselves, while special events take place at nearby israel tennis centers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 89.8%; rating input score 90; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 53 of 59 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $217K · 63 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $697K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.