Kirkwood Soccer Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510215176
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New Castle, DE, USA
Phone
3023224220
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$116,910
Expenses
$508,587
Assets
$191,996
Liabilities
$37,789

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE FEDERICO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW SAXTON (DIR OF REC S): $46,400 total reported compensation
  • LAURA LEE (SECRETARY): $8,826 total reported compensation
  • MIKE FEDERICO (PRESIDENT): $1,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The kirkwood soccer club exists to promote the development of youth in our community through participation in athletic competition. Our goal is to provide activities that offer recreational, social and physical development for children of all skill levels. We are committed to providing participants with the opportunity to develop athletically and personally in a positive, supportive, and safe environment. The kirkwood soccer club encourages and promotes ethical and moral behavior, good sportsmanship, community involvement and good citizenship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Kirkwood soccer club runs field hockey development programs in fall, spring and summer, foundations year round, recreation in fall and spring youth development programs for development of youth in athletic participation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -335%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $451K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.