Mustang Youth Football Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863269267
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
7032826236
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,822
Expenses
$89,282
Assets
$3,883
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM MOHNING (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRENT STARR (DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID MCENANEY (DIRECTOR)
  • ANDY DALKA (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

The purpose of the mustang youth football program is to provide an enjoyable experience for each youth participant; develop character, skills, sportsmanship; and to promote good will among all teams and individuals.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mustang youth football program successfully fielded five teams and provided the opportunity for players in 4th through 8th grade to participate in youth football. The program was delivered using volunteers and board members. The team was successful on the field with three of five teams reaching the omaha metro playoffs and advancing to the league semifinals.

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

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: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 8; 8th 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: 50.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.