Morgan Hill Water Polo Co Detailed Office Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205685671
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Morgan Hill, CA, USA
Phone
6503904509
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$19,702
Assets
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL CETANI (President)
  • CEDRIC WALKER (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • PAUL CETANI (President)
  • CEDRIC WALKER (Vice President)
  • SUE STAPLETON (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

Youth amateur water polo on a local and national level

What it reported doing in 2025

Our goal is to honor the game of water polo by teaching the fundamentals of the sport, the rules of the game along with respect for officials, teammates, opponents and self. Our philosophy is to develop the whole child and we encourage participation in a variety of sports and activities and we allow for flexibility and seasonal commitment to the program. Water polo athletes are considered to be some of the finest conditioned athletes on earth. We provide a safe environment within which Northern Californian youth can experience this fast paced, exciting sport. The program is open to boys and girls entering junior high through high school, 11-18 years of age. Aquatically skilled younger children may participate at the Coachs discretion.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

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: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • 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: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -57.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th 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 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 4 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.