Izzys Wing
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 993317335
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Marana, AZ, USA
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Sports Associations &Training Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $59,738
- Expenses
- $44,411
- Assets
- $38,719
- Liabilities
- $194
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Danette Horky-Bucsko (CEO)
People named in this filing
- Danette Horky-Bucsko (CEO)
- John Bucsko (Secretary)
- Michael Berg (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Izzys Wings mission is two fold: 1 to offer donation based canopy coaching so that this important skill is accessible to everyone and to promote fellowship among the community and 2 provide financial assistance for medical expenses and end of life expenses for those who do not have insurance or are underinsured. For donation based canopy coaching we host events across the US at mostly small to mid size skydiving centers by traveling from our home in Arizona. Most of the expense incurred after the start up expenses is for his travel.
What it reported doing in 2025
We have hosted more than 20 events in 2025 across 10 states training more than 300 skydivers in our donation based courses. They are free to attend. We also provided medical expense assistance to one individual where insurance did not cover medical expenses.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.8%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 54.8%; rating input score 55
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.8% of revenue deployed · 54.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 41/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.