Moapa Valley Youth Football
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 822185097
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Overton, NV, US
- Phone
- 4355313111
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $57,417
- Expenses
- $31,180
- Assets
- $40,904
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHANE HICKMAN (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- SHANE HICKMAN (PRESIDENT)
- MELISSA GILLEO (SECRETARY)
- TAYNA HOLMSTEAD (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
To provide a positive youth football experience in Moapa Valley, developing young athletes in grades 3-8 through professional coaching, community involvement, and a focus on integrity, resilience, and leadership.
What it reported doing in 2025
To provide a youth football program for those in 3rd through 8th grade.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 54.3%; rating input score 54
- 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: 45.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 55; 55th 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: -84.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 94.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 10 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 54.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.