Minooka Lacrosse Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371562868
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Minooka, IL, USA
Phone
8155219217
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,811
Expenses
$53,427
Assets
$33,170
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN JACKSON (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVE MCATEE (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRIAN JACKSON (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVE MCATEE (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • VANESSA HOLLOWAY (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide the opportunity and means for all interested youth to learn about and participate in a high quality lacrosse program. Also, to promote, develop, and encourage good sportmanship and citizenship by student athletes both on and off the playing field.

What it reported doing in 2015

Minooka lacrosse provided 105 youths an opportunity to learn and excel in the game of lacrosse and to develop positive character qualities through general athletic coaching. The organization consists of 5 teams.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 91.6%; rating input score 92

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 35; 35th 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: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.4% of revenue deployed · 91.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.