New England Sports Complex Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061618010
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Dover, NH, USA
Phone
2072516529
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Recreational Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,007,528
Expenses
$564,624
Assets
$6,768,161
Liabilities
$42,609

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN RICKERT (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT LAMBERT (GENERAL MANAGER AND DIRECT): $187,958 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At first push syndicate, we are committed to improving wellness by creating, activating, and supporting inclusive outdoor programs that provide opportunities for school-age children to develop leadership, grit, and resilience. We believe that investing in these lifelong activities will empower the next generation to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program 2 retreat space in orland, Maine - first push provides access to a lakeside retreat space for other non-profits and school-based clubs that serve school-age children. The purpose of the space is to enhance opportunities for students to explore beyond their local communities and create new connections socially and with the outside. The retreat also serves as a seasonal hub for an equipment library in the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - Revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.4%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.99; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.4% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $403K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.