North Texas Vintage Sportscar Assn

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453323538
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Weatherford, TX, USA
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,500
Expenses
$856
Assets
$138,199
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN J McGRATH (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES E MACE (DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN J McGRATH (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
  • ELIZABETH A McGRATH (SECRETARY AND 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. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To acquire and preserve a collection of significant sports muscle and racing cars spanning the decades from 1930 to 1980

What it reported doing in 2016

To preserve and acquire a collection of significant sports muscle and racing cars spanning the decades from 1930 to 1980.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 161.45; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -53.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -90.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $856 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.