Nashville NHL All-Star Game Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472426251
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6157433127
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Athletic Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$981,595
Expenses
$2,334,934
Assets
$6,933
Liabilities
$2,067

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT RAMSEY (SECRETARY): $214,147 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT MCGILBERRY (TREASURER): $65,281 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the nashville nhl all-star game, inc. Is to deliver a premiere nhl all-star weekend event experience that is second to none, showcasing all of the enthusiasm, entertainment and hospitality that the music city has to offer, while producing a significant economic impact for the greater nashville area.

What it reported doing in 2016

2016 nhl all-star game results:- 388 credentialed media from all over the world covered the event.- all-star game achieved a 1.17 hh rating with 1,595,000 viewers. This represents a 24% year-over-year increase for the event. This also represents the highest rating the event has achieved since being telecast on nbc sports network. In addition, the skills competition had 870,000 viewers, a slight decrease from last year. Game was telecast in over 160 countries and territories.- over 59,000 people attended the intellicentrics outdoor concert series at bridgestone winter park.- nhl fan fair saw a slight increase in attendance, with 34,200 fans attending (a 2% year-over-year increase)- press surrounding the event was overwhelmingly positive. Social media and formal media alike were extremely positive across the board.- economic impact report will be released in the coming weeks. Expected to achieve approximately $20,000,000 in economic impact.- event has been a huge pr boon for the nashville sports council (nsc). The nsc was responsible for interacting with and programming all local media outside of the arena. Local coverage was extensive and thorough and allowed the nsc to strengthen and build relationships with local media outlets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.3%; rating input score 91; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -137.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 147.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -56.2% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -198% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 23 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.