Milwaukee Striders Track Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391365676
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4145599224
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,773
Expenses
$26,714
Assets
$19,232
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT HARRIS (PRESIDENT)
  • VILEY WELCH (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ROBERT HARRIS (PRESIDENT)
  • VILEY WELCH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEED WELCH (MEMBER)

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

Mission: the joe sism' milwaukee striders track club provides a coordinated city wide service of constructive, organized and supervised recreation and education using the sport of track and field, in which young athletes from diverse backgrounds have the opportunity to grow as an athlete and an individual

What it reported doing in 2013

Track & Field Milwaukee youth face a number of barriers to success. In many inner city schools, only half the students graduate from high school; student are truant, and falling behind their grade levels. The face other pressures brought about by financial and family circumstances. Striders provides opportunities for young people to be involved in a positive competitive environment that emphasizes charcter development and academics. Striders do not just provide an outlet for youth; its training methosds and positive reinforcement provide youth with tools they will need for success not only on the track but in life. Striders help them set goals and then show them the steps on how to reach those goals. Striders open opportunities and open dreams that athletes never knew was possible.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 39; 39th 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: -33.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -45.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.