North Union Athletic Committee Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453308299
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Richwood, OH, USA
Phone
9372433743
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,051
Expenses
$38,814
Assets
$35,245
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUAN SANDUSKY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALISON JOLIFF (TRUSTEE)
  • DONNY RIDGEWAY (TRUSTEE)
  • GINA DAVIS (TRUSTEE)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide support for the athletic programs of the north union local school district and to encourage and foster athletic activities of students in the local schools

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided the following athletic equipment or facility updates to the following athletics at north union. Nu baseball turtle fencing for baseball diamond; scoreboard for football, track, and soccer games at the facility; softball upgrades for the dugout bat and helmet rack as well as hitting nets and softballs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.8%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.