Minneapolis Police Activities League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411719527
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6126733953
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Centers, Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$290
Expenses
$10,770
Assets
$106,791

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NOAH CROOM (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NOAH CROOM (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF PETERSON (VICE CHAIR/V)
  • JAMAL ABU-SHAMALA (SECRETARY)

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

To reduce juvinile crime and violence by using police officers and community members as coaches and mentors for the inner city youth.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization sponsors and runs a wide range of youth sports programs throughout the year. There were multiple football teams participating in the program. These programs are used to teach kids of all ages good sportsmanship, teamwork, and self-discipline in a safe environment. More than 200 youth from several neighborhood areas participate with over 100 police officers donating time. These programs are free for kids to participate and all equipment and facilities are provided by the organization or partnering organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - 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: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 64.5%; rating input score 64

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3,613.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.92; rating input score 92; 92nd 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: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 64.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.