Nashville Predators Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621751832
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6157702303
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,179,774
Expenses
$2,170,525
Assets
$1,550,105
Liabilities
$737,176

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA KING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/VP)
  • SEAN HENRY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • REBECCA KING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/VP)
  • SEAN HENRY (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE KENNEDY (CHAIRMAN)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Foundation is a public non-profit organization established to conduct charitable activities and raise funds for contributions to various charities

What it reported doing in 2024

Predators foundation grants - the nashville predators foundation strives to meet the educational, social, health, and cultural needs of our community by offering unique resources and financial support through helper grants and other direct contributions to local youth-oriented organizations. The predators foundation awards grants to nashville and middle-tn non-profits through the annual helper grant cycle. Helper grants are awarded for specific projects and one-time programs, but not for general operating costs, staff salaries, sponsorships or fundraisers of any kind, capital campaigns or building improvement projects, endowments or reserve funds or grants to individuals, ptas or booster clubs. Grant applications through this process are due at the end of january, reviewed, selected and voted on by predators foundation board members in march/april and funds are distributed in may. Additional grants and donations are issued throughout the year to organizations located in or benefiting nashville and middle-tn that are selected by nashville predators players, ownership and the nhl (as part of league initiatives). These grants and donations are coordinated by the foundation's executive director.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 68%; rating input score 68; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 62 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 63 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.