Lone Star Region Volleyball Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 751676037
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Schertz, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2109454365
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $962,466
- Expenses
- $390,641
- Assets
- $4,963,996
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Will Vick (Commissioner): $89,000 total reported compensation
- Gloria Cox (Jr. Dev. Dir.): $37,760 total reported compensation
- Karen Tarmon (Media Director): $36,740 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose for which this corporation is organized is to foster national and international amateur volleyball competition. In furtherance of this main purpose, the following sub-purposes are set forth: 1. To teach the sport of volleyball to children and adults by holding clinics conducted by qualified instructors in schools, play-grounds and parks; 2. To provide practice volleyball sessions, classroom lectures, seminars and panel discussions through which selected trainees may be schooled in competitive coaching, playing, officiating and scouting techniques; 3. To foster and conduct area, state, regional and national amateur volleyball competitions; 4. To act as the official representative of USA Volleyball within an area designated as the Lone Star Region; 5. To select and train suitable candidates in the techniques of volleyball in national and international competition and thereby improve the caliber of candidates representing the United States in Olympic, Pan American and World Ga
What it reported doing in 2025
Volleyball training and tournaments; publish quarterly newsletter and mailing to membership; conduct conferences and Board meetings for Adult and Junior members.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 39
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 26.5%; rating input score 27
- Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: 59.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.71; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 51.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 26.5% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $279K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 19 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.