Junior Golf Association of Arizona Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860464216
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6029446168
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,320,997
Expenses
$2,193,049
Assets
$1,127,149
Liabilities
$329,513

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT MCNEVIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT MCNEVIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $148,453 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to serve as the umbrella organization for providing, fostering, and supporting comprehensive golf programs for youth in Arizona.

What it reported doing in 2025

The junior golf association of Arizona (jgaa) is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to enriching the lives of the youth of Arizona through the game of golf. Four of our most popular developmental programs are: (1)jgaa tournaments - most competitive of the events conducted by the jgaa; (2)lpga*usga girls golf - a developmental golf program designed for girls ages 6-18; (3) itty bitty open - a once-a-year event held every january for 3-5 year olds, with 15 sites across maricopa country. The event annually attracts over 700 kids. The jgaa conducts more than 100 programs and activities, including etiquette clinics, tournaments, and college prep seminars throughout Arizona each year. (continued on schedule o)the jgaa funds youth on course - Arizona, which is a golf access program where junior golfers can play rounds of golf for only $5 per round. There are more than 30 courses in Arizona, that are part of the youth on course program. In 2025, the jgaa subsidized more than $153,600 in junior course fees through youth on course (28,000 rounds of golf). The jgaa also awards numerous college scholarships annually to high school senior members of the jgaa for their college education. The jgaa's strong belief in teamwork and cooperation continues to guide the organization and is instilled in all of its members.

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 93% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 34th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $148K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $415K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.