Michigan Lakeshore Aquatics

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271574173
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Zeeland, MI, USA
Phone
6164438946
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,325
Expenses
$60,682
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRAD HEERES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LYNN DENAVE (TREASURER)
  • TAIJOH AFRIK (DIRECTOR)
  • ED DENAVE (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

The organization supports interested athletes and their families the abililty to participate in competitive aquatics programs and opportunities offered through the Michigan lakeshore aquatics as an amateur athlete in state, regional, and national swimming and diving programs while promoting good sportsmanship and community involvement.

What it reported doing in 2016

This is booster organization provided financial support to athletes through scholarship; support through social events; and financial support for other related endeavors. Approximately 120 youth participated during the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -323.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st 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: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -21.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.