Montgomery County Swim League Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521175369
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Germantown, MD, USA
- Phone
- 2404470305
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,719
- Expenses
- $77,525
- Assets
- $53,513
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- J MOORE (PRESIDENT)
- R FAYED (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- M AMENT (BOARD OF DIRECTOR)
- T DONLEY (BOARD OF DIRECTOR)
- J GARNER (BOARD OF 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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide organized, friendly team competition within a fair and wholesome environment at the neighborhood pool level; to help young people develop athletic skills; and to foster good sportsmanship, teamwork, and an appreciation of the relationship between effort and success.
What it reported doing in 2024
Montgomery county swim league, inc. (mcsl) consists of 91 swim teams with more than 14,000 children aged 18 years or younger. Mcsl provided rules, awards, administrative paperwork, training for officials, and organization for children to participate in summer swim meets in a structured environment.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.1% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $74K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.