Logan Aquatic Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870412093
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Smithfield, UT, USA
Phone
4357573750
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,907
Expenses
$37,367
Assets
$10,732

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HANNE SORENSEN (President)
  • LYNETTE SEVILLA (Vice President)
  • GREG CHRISTIANSEN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • HANNE SORENSEN (President)
  • ALICIA CONLEY (Secretary)
  • LYNETTE SEVILLA (Vice President)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide swimming programs for children in a competitive atmosphere. To encourage young people to meet their full potential in swimming in a friendly, professional environment that provides the opportunity to compete in local, state, and national meets. Swimmers are also encouraged to develop a joy in leading an active lifestyle and a desire to achieve and maintain their physical fitness.

What it reported doing in 2015

The organization successfully provided a competitive swimming program for the members of the team.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.8% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.