Methacton Ice Hockey Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931496367
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Collegeville, PA, USA
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,627
Expenses
$48,733
Assets
$13,876

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Frank Pavgouzas (President)
  • Jason Gwilliam (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Frank Pavgouzas (President)
  • Jason Gwilliam (Vice President)
  • Melissa Bower (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Non Profit Ice Hockey Club for Methacton School District students. Clubs primary function to provide a leadership group to organize and run ice hockey teams at local Elementary Middle School and High School leagues. Club provides a brotherhood sisterhood for ice hockey players in Methacton schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

The club supported 1 High School team 2 Middle School teams and 2 Elementary school teams. The club had over 70 total participants. Volunteer coaches at ES MS and HS levels. Each team had practices held at local rink and league games for each level. Each league provided 10 to 16 games plus playoffs. To accomplish these services we had expenses to local ice hockey rink 16100 for practice slots to local ES MS and HS leagues 30600. Additional fees 2,170 paid for advertising yard signs for club uniforms club registration software tax software additional Outdoor games and fundraiser supplies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.4%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.