Northern Ohio PGA Section Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462892850
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Warrensville Heights, OH, USA
Phone
2167651214
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Golf

Reported finances

Revenue
$436,833
Expenses
$391,524
Assets
$527,174
Liabilities
$695

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID GRIFFITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MATT CREECH (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE CARTER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID GRIFFITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MATT CREECH (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE CARTER (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

The northern Ohio pga section foundation was created for the purpose of administrating the charitable and philanthropic affairs on behalf of the golf professionals within the northern Ohio pga section. These affairs include, but are not limited to, development, promotion and growth of adult and junior golf programs, scholarship programs for children, programs for minority and underprivileged youth in northern Ohio, and contributions to allied charitable organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

BIRDIES FOR CHARITY - Twenty-seven professionals from fourteen facilities played 72 holes of golf to benefit five Northern Ohio charities on September 27th. The Northern Ohio PGA Section Foundation selected five charities that it would support this year including The Turn, Ohio Girls Golf Foundation, Clearview H.O.P.E., Cleveland Clinic Challenge Golf, and the Ben Curtis Family Foundation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.8%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 29.9%; rating input score 30
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd 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: 20%; rating input score 20; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.8% of revenue deployed · 29.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $392K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.