Manhattan Roller Hockey League Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830481347
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2008
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2127562029
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Winter Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,000
Expenses
$90,593
Assets
$2,697
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Tom Smith (Chairman)
  • Mark Barbour (Board member)
  • Chris Pelka (Treasurer)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Manhattan Roller Hockey League was established as a not-for-profit corporation so the adult roller hockey league program shut down at Chelsea Piers in August 2006 could be revived at a new venue. We hold Spring and Fall seasons at the Paul McDermott rink in Stanley Isaacs Park at 96th Street and First Avenue on the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

What it reported doing in 2013

Promoting and advancing the sport of roller hockey in New York City by fostering relationships with other local, national and international leagues, coaching a 1st through 8th grade children's program and participating in NARCh and other tournaments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 44
  • Growth: 60

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: 5.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

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 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.