Manhattan Azul Y Oro Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812424666
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9179139959
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Soccer
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,826
- Expenses
- $8,008
- Assets
- $5,918
- Liabilities
- $100
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALESSANDRO UVA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- ALESSANDRO UVA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- JUAN CARLOS FAISCA (SECRETARY DIRECTOR)
- CESAR ROBIO (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Charitable fundrasing for the benefit of children of heath and medical needs. The funds are provided for childrens groups (ie: youth athletic, educational services and other tax exempt childrens charities. Corporation is orgainized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational and scientific prrposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organiztions that qualify as exempt organizations under section 503(c)(3) of the internal revenue code, or that corresponding section of any future federal tax code.
What it reported doing in 2016
Sumandomanos
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 42.1%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.