Lanier Volleyball Club Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 465665894
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Gainesville, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7703612422
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $77,121
- Expenses
- $61,804
- Assets
- $16,992
- Liabilities
- $1,675
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- DAVID PEAKE (EXECUTIVE DI)
- MARY BETH PEAKE (DIRECTOR OF)
- BARD AUFFARTH (DIRECTOR)
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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Lanier volleyball clubs mission is to provide athletes in the north Georgia area with the highest level of technical, tactical and physical training available so that they may reach their peak potential as volleyball players. We seek to instill values that will help each athlete to succeed both on and off the court including: a sense of family and faith, hard work, perseverance, discipline, commitment, teamwork, competition and respect. Lanier volleyball club strives to offer a consistent and unified coaching philosophy and process for every member at a reasonable cost.
What it reported doing in 2014
Provide athletes in the north Georgia area with the highest level of technical, tactical and physical training available so that they may reach their peak potential as volleyball players.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 84% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.7%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 19.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.7% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.