Mendocino County Sports Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465292113
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ukiah, CA, USA
Phone
7079727312
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Soccer

Reported finances

Revenue
$526,026
Expenses
$540,492
Assets
$91,970
Liabilities
$812

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Shane Huff (President, Director of Coaches)
  • Naomi Rhodes (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Shane Huff (President, Director of Coaches): $40,452 total reported compensation
  • Jennifer Hofstetter (Treasurer): $7,200 total reported compensation
  • Naomi Rhodes (Vice President): $3,856 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Mendocino County Sports Academy operates a sports program that benefits the youth of Mendocino County. MCSA is dedicated to 1) Teaching sports with an emphasis on age appropriate development 2) Teaching the ideals of sports, including: sportsmanship, teamwork, good citizenship and all-around growth 3) Developing self-esteem, confidence, and general fitness 4) Keeping youth involved in worthwhile activities

What it reported doing in 2024

Select Teams: A program directed at older players. Youth in this program are organized into teams which participate at a competitive level appropriate for the group. A full season typically includes participation in a fall league, a spring league, and tournaments. The typical duration of a season is from 7 to 9 months. During this time, participants meet 3x per week for instruction in fitness, technical skills, personal development, and group and individual tactical skills. Children served: 312

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.2%; rating input score 89; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -25.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $457K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.