Novo Volleyball
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 993733477
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6194536457
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $101,744
- Expenses
- $88,454
- Assets
- $29,109
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RODRIGO PEREZ MARTINEZ SUELOTTO (CEO)
People named in this filing
- RODRIGO PEREZ MARTINEZ SUELOTTO (CEO)
- AMANI HEKIM WALKER (TREASURER)
- SETH DAVID TUNICK (CORPORATE SECRETARY)
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 develop youth athletes through volleyball-based training programs that build fundamental skills, teamwork, confidence, and a love for the sport in a structured, positive, and inclusive environment.
What it reported doing in 2025
Novo summer camps are short-term training programs offered throughout the summer for youth athletes of varying skill levels. These camps focus on fundamental volleyball skill development, including serving, passing, setting, and attacking, while also promoting teamwork and enjoyment of the sport. Camps are designed for both beginner and intermediate players and provide a structured, positive environment where participants can improve their skills, build confidence, and engage in physical activity during the off-season.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 32
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.6%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 35.2%; rating input score 35
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 13.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 30.6% of revenue deployed · 35.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.